Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T12:00:53.047Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Critical Problems of Canadian Federalism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Alexander Brady
Alexander Brady
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Canadian federalism in recent years has been passing through the sharpest crisis in its history, a crisis which emerges out of its legal structure and the new financial strains to which it has been subjected in the decade of depression. The appointment in 1937 of a Royal Commission to investigate extensively federal and provincial relations was a tardy recognition by the government at Ottawa that the complex economic and constitutional problems of the Canadian state require thorough study, and informed treatment on the basis of such study. In an article necessarily brief, the background to the malady of the federal system can be sketched in only the broadest outlines.

Type
Foreign Government and Politics
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 32 , Issue 5 , October 1938 , pp. 957 - 965
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1938

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Kennedy, W. P. M., Documents of the Canadian Constitution (Toronto, 1918), p. 606Google Scholar.

2 In the early years of federation, Sir John Macdonald clearly acted on the assumption that the lieutenant-governors were little more than the obedient servants of the federal government, an assumption well illustrated in his correspondence with Sir James Aikins, lieutenant-governor of Manitoba, 1882–88.

3 In the 18 years previous to 1937, there were only four cases of disallowance by the federal authority, in contrast to some 45 during the first 20 years of federation. The decline in use of the disallowance power set in at the turn of the century. The disallowance in 1937 of certain legislation of Mr. Aberhart's government has led to an appeal to the Supreme Court to determine the constitutionality of disallowance by the federal government. At the time of writing, the Supreme Court has not pronounced on the matter.

4 Quoted from the Juridical Review of 1899 by Scott, F. R., “The Royal Commission in Dominion-Provincial Relations,” University of Toronto Quarterly, January, 1938Google Scholar.

5 See Scott, F. R., “The Privy Council and Mr. Bennett's New Deal Legislation,” Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, May, 1937Google Scholar; also articles by various authorities in the special constitutional number of the Canadian Bar Review, June, 1937.

6 Mackintosh, W. A. et al. , Economic Problems of the Prairie Provinces (Toronto, 1935), p. 26Google Scholar.

7 Dunkin's, speech in Parliamentary Debates on Subject of Confederation (1865), p. 519 ff.Google Scholar

8 A strong case against the unconditional subsidies hitherto paid in Canada is presented by Maxwell, J. A. in Federal Subsidies to the Provincial Governments in Canada (Cambridge, Mass., 1937)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Adarkar, B. P., The Principles and Problems of Federal Finance (London, 1933), Ch. 7Google Scholar.

9 See Manitoba's Case: A Submission Presented to the Royal Commission on Dominion-Provincial Relations (Winnipeg, 1937)Google Scholar; and A Submission by the Government of Saskatchewan (Regina, 1937)Google Scholar.

10 The Canadian Manufacturers' Association submitted much evidence on the embarrassments of the existing taxation system before the Royal Commission on Dominion-Provincial Relations, January 17,1938. The representative of the association claimed that an ordinary industrial company operating in all the provinces is required to file about one hundred annual returns to taxing authorities, involving much inconvenience and expense.

11 The Globe and Mail, Toronto, January 11, 1938Google Scholar.