In Re Dean

DUFF J.-I think I have no jurisdiction to entertain this application. It will not be necessary, in view of my opinion as to the construction of section 62 of the "Supreme Court Act," to decide the point raised by the contention of Mr. Johnston, on behalf of the Attorney-General for British Columbia, that that enactment is beyoid the competence of the Parliament of Canada. Section 62 is as follows:- The language indicates an intention on the part of Parliament to confer only a strictly limited jurisdiction. Anything like frequent interposition in the administration of the criminal law in the provinces by the judges of the Supreme Court of Canada, through the instrumentality of the writ of habeas corpus, would obviously lead to the most undesirable results; and, before exercising the authority in a given case, I think it is my duty to scrutinize most carefully the terms in which that authority is given to ascertain whether or not the cise is clearly one of those in which it was intended to be exercised.

The jurisdiction extends only, I think, to those cases in which the "commitment" has followed upon a charge of a criminal offence which is a criminal offence by virtue of some statutory enactment of the Parliament of Canada; it does not, in my opinion, extend to cases in which the "commitment" is for an offence which was an offence at common law or under IN a statute which was passed prior to Confederation and is still in force.

That, I think, is the effect of previous decisions by judges of this court. See Re Sproule(l). The offence for which the applicant was committed to stand his trial is thus described in the warrant of commitment: These words aptly describe an offence under section 15 of 7 & 8 Geo. IV. ch. 29, which became part of the law of British Columbia under the ordinance of the 19th November, 1858, introducing the civil and criminal law of England into that colony. This enactient continued to be a part of te criminal law of British Columbia down to the time of the Union with Canada, and, by section 11 of the "Criminal Code" it is now part of the "criminal law" of the province in so far as it has not been repealed, "altered, varied, modified or affected" by competent legislative authority. The only change relates to the nature of the punishient to which an offender is liable.

Section 62 has, consequently, no application. Application refused.