Dow v Black
| Dow v Black | |
|---|---|
.svg) |
|
| Court | Judicial Committee of the Privy Council |
| Decided | James Dow and others v William T Black and others |
| Citation(s) | (1875), L.R. 6 P.C. 272, [1875] UKPC 17 (P.C.) |
| Case history | |
| Appealed from |
The Queen v. Dow (1873), 14 N.B.R. 300 (N.B. S.C.) .svg){kind=small}
|
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting |
Sir James W. Colville Lord Justice James Lord Justice Mellish Sir Montague E. Smith |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Sir James W. Colvile |
| Keywords | |
| Constitutional law; division of powers; inter-jurisdictional railways; direct taxation; matters of a local and private nature | |
| R v Dow | |
|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court of New Brunswick |
| Full case name | The Queen v Dow and others |
| Decided | 22 February 1873 |
| Citation(s) | (1873), 14 N.B.R. 300 (N.B. S.C.) |
| Case history | |
| Appealed to | Judicial Committee of the Privy Council |
| Subsequent action(s) | Appeal allowed |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting |
Ritchie C.J. Allen J. Weldon J. Fisher J. |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Allen J., Ritchie C.J. and Weldon J. concurring Fisher J. (dissenting) |
| Keywords | |
| Constitutional law; division of powers; inter-jurisdictional railways; direct taxation; matters of a local and private nature | |
Dow v Black is a Canadian constitutional law court decision. It was one of the first major cases examining in detail the division of powers between the federal Parliament and the provincial Legislatures, set out in s. 91 and s. 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867 (formerly known as the British North America Act, 1867). The case was decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, at that time the court of last resort for Canada within the British Empire, on appeal from the Supreme Court of New Brunswick.
The case considered the constitutionality of a provincial statute which authorised the inhabitants of the parish of St. Stephen, New Brunswick to issue a debenture as an inducement to a railway company to build a railway connecting an 8-mile section from Debec, New Brunswick to the town of Houlton, Maine, in the United States. The Supreme Court of New Brunswick held that the statute was unconstitutional, since it intruded on the exclusive federal jurisdiction over inter-jurisdictional railways. The Judicial Committee allowed an appeal from the Supreme Court of New Brunswick and held that the legislation was within provincial jurisdiction as a matter of local taxation, coming under sections 92(2) and 92(16) of the Constitution Act, 1867. The statute did not intrude on federal jurisdiction over inter-jurisdictional railways, under s. 91(29) and s. 92(10) of the Constitution Act, 1867.
St. Stephen is a town in Charlotte County, New Brunswick, adjacent to Calais, Maine. Houlton is a town in Maine, some 125km NNW of St. Stephen.
In June 1867, a few weeks before the Constitution Act, 1867 came into effect, the Legislature of New Brunswick passed an Act incorporating at the behest of William Lindsay, MPP and others, the Houlton Branch Railway Company, fundamentally to complete the St. Andrews and Quebec Railway, which would not even transit St. Stephen. Meanwhile, the European and North American Railway had constructed from 1865-1869 its Western Extension line from Saint John to Bangor, Maine, which included in York County some 50km North of St. Stephen, McAdam, New Brunswick and the Saint Croix-Vanceboro Railway Bridge.
...
Wikipedia