The Canadian Election of 1926

1927 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-113
Author(s):  
Walter R. Sharp
Keyword(s):  
General Election ◽  
House Of Commons ◽  
Liberal Party ◽  
Party Government ◽  
History Of ◽  
Clear Majority

For the second time within twelve months, the continuing parliamentary tangle in Canada gave rise, on September 14, 1926, to a general election which not only was one of the most bitterly contested in years, but was focused, on the surface at least, upon a constitutional crisis without precedent in the history of the dominion. The outcome, however, proved to be considerably more decisive than the conflict of a year before, the Liberal party winning 119 seats—only four short of a clear majority in the House of Commons—which, with its Progressive and farmer allies, should mean that it will be able to restore relatively stable party government to Canada for the next few years.

Home rule and the liberal party, 1899–1906

1963 ◽  
Vol 13 (52) ◽  
pp. 316-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
H.W. McCready
Keyword(s):  
Party Politics ◽  
Home Rule ◽  
House Of Commons ◽  
Liberal Party ◽  
Financial Measures ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
History Of ◽  
Liberal Reform ◽  
The Commons ◽  
Pros And Cons

Gladstone’s dramatic commitment of the liberal party to a policy of home rule for Ireland in 1886 was followed by the Grand Old Man’s two attempts at turning his policy into legislation. The first home rule bill, that of 1886, was defeated in the house of commons and then in a general election: the second, that of 1893, was overwhelmed in the house of lords and then dropped by Gladstone’s fourth government. Though the Gladstonian commitment remained and the liberal party continued to be a home rule party — and though the pros and cons of the union of 1800 remained the major structural feature of British party politics — it was not until 1912 that the liberals did anything further about their major Irish policy. For most of the period 1893-1912 they were, of course, impotent in opposition and consequently in no position to take the initiative on home rule. In 1906, however, they won a landslide victory over their unionist opponents and it is striking that this electoral victory and the great impulse it gave to one of the most dynamic governments in the whole history of British liberalism was not followed, as had the last two liberal victories under Gladstone, by the introduction of a third home rule bill. Had the liberal landslide of 1906 been put behind another home rule measure the whole history of the matter would certainly have been radically different. The house of lords would have been easily overwhelmed; the great advance in constitutional reform for Ireland would have been carried in a spirit of liberal reform rather than of political surrender; the development of Sinn Fein would have been frustrated or at least diverted. But the liberal victory of 1906 was not so used. Home rule was postponed and sidetracked and was taken up again only when the liberal party once more desperately needed Irish votes in the budget election which followed the rejection of Lloyd George’s financial measures by the lords in November 1909. The home rule banner was hoisted afresh by Asquith, the prime minister, in his Albert Hall speechof 10 December 1909 and the third home rule bill appeared in due course in 1912 in direct — and significant — succession to the budget and the parliament act for both of which the Asquith government needed Irish support in the commons.

The Japanese Privy Council

1931 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 881-905
Author(s):  
Kenneth Colegrove
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Japanese Government ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Liberal Party ◽  
Considerable Part ◽  
Party Government ◽  
Lower House ◽  
History Of

The growth of the democratic element in Japanese government has not been without effect on the Privy Council. In the early years of its history, the Council and the ministry were institutions serving the same classes and seeing eye to eye. This was true not only under the presidency of Ito, Oki, and Yamagata (1889-94), but also even during a considerable part of the period when party government was struggling for supremacy. In those days, political parties in the House of Representatives were balked by the bureaucrats, clansmen, and militarists entrenched in the administrative branch, while the seats in the Council were occupied by the great leaders of these controlling classes. But the doctrine of ministerial responsibility had begun to take root. In 1895, the Ito ministry abandoned the principle of executive independence of political parties and accepted an alliance with the Jiyuto, or Liberal party. In 1898, the Kenseito, or Constitutional party, under the leadership of Okuma and Itagaki, was given the opportunity of forming the first party cabinet in the history of Japan. Upon its fall, caused by internal dissension, the succeeding ministry under Yamagata (1898-1900) contained no party men, although the premier condescended to an alliance with the Kenseito. In 1900, Ito himself formed the Seiyukai, and brought the second party cabinet into office. But it was not until the first Kenseikai ministry, under Okuma and Kato (1914-16), and the fifth Seiyukai ministry under Hara (1918-21), that well-grounded ministerial parties controlled the lower house.

‘Parnellism And Crime’, 1887–90

1974 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 123-140
Author(s):  
F. S. L. Lyons
Keyword(s):  
Home Rule ◽  
House Of Commons ◽  
Liberal Party ◽  
Nationalist Party ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
The Future ◽  
History Of

The Home Rule crisis of 1885–86 is generally held to mark a water-shed in the history of Anglo-Irish relations. This it undoubtedly does, though not necessarily for the reasons commonly advanced. The crisis was certainly important in the sense that it obliged the Liberal and Conservative parties to define their attitudes towards Irish self-government and thus to demonstrate to the Irish nationalist party in the House of Commons that their main hope for the future lay with Mr Gladstone and those Liberals who had remained faithful to him after his declaration in favour of Home Rule. But the course of events during 1886 demonstrated just how far the Irish demand still was from being met. The inadequacies of the Home Rule Bill itself, the split in the Liberal party, the firm negative of the Conservatives, the violence of the Ulster Protestant reaction, the veto of the House of Lords which had not even to be deployed in 1886 but was there for future use when necessary—all these things suggested that Home Rule, if it came at all, would not happen overnight at the waving of any Parnellite wand, but would require years, perhaps decades, of labour before it came within sight of achievement.

The British Political Scene Since the General Election

1929 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 892-907
Author(s):  
Roger H. Soltau
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
General Election ◽  
House Of Commons ◽  
Labor Party ◽  
Minority Candidate ◽  
The One ◽  
Political Scene ◽  
Clear Majority

A general election has been aptly compared to an instantaneous photograph of a galloping horse. It is a static representation of a public opinion that is by its very essence perpetually changing, and a newly elected House of Commons has not yet met before it is in a sense out of date and no longer fully representative. Even if a general election photograph had permanent significance, it would be open to the criticism of inaccuracy at the time of taking. Readers of this Review are aware of the misleading character of the British electoral machine—of the fact that whenever more than two candidates contest a constituency, the one elected may very well represent but a fraction over a third of the electorate; so that election statistics show a serious discrepancy between the distribution of votes and the allocation of seats.On the eve of dissolution, the House of Commons comprised 400 Conservative, 162 Socialist, and 46 Liberal members, with seven Independents. The new House comprises 289 Socialists, 260 Conservatives, 59 Liberals, and seven Independents. This distribution of seats, we have said, does not accurately correspond to that of votes cast, since the Socialists polled 8,370,005 votes, the Conservatives 8,641,170, and the Liberals 5,295,308. The usual explanation of the discrepancy is that the Labor party had all the luck of the three-cornered contests in which a minority candidate was returned. This, however, happens to be false; that luck went to the Conservatives: of 313 successful “minority” candidates, 153 are Conservatives, 122 Socialists, and 38 Liberals; while of 291 seats held by a clear majority, Socialists have 166, Conservatives 105, and Liberals 20.

The Japanese General Election of 1952

1953 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 199-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul S. Dull
Keyword(s):  
Communist Party ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
General Election ◽  
Liberal Party ◽  
Conservative Government ◽  
Clear Majority

Japan, on October 1, 1952, held the first general election for members of the House of Representatives since the end of the occupation. In that election, the conservative government party, the Jiyūtō (Liberal party), won a clear majority, the Communist party failed to elect a single candidate, and there was a marked advance by the two Socialist parties.

Reorganization of the Governmental Structure of Roumania

1931 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 700-703
Author(s):  
Joseph S. Roucek
Keyword(s):  
Central Administration ◽  
World War ◽  
Liberal Party ◽  
Old Kingdom ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Will ◽  
The Law ◽  
Self Rule ◽  
The University

The law for the reorganization of central administration and the law on local administration (July 20, 1929) sponsored by the National Peasant government of Roumania have recently been put into effect. Both measures were drafted by Professors Negulescu, of the University of Bucharest, and Alexianu, of the University of Cernauţi. Their adoption comprises one of the most thorough governmental reforms in the history of the Balkans.The structure of the Roumanian government was, until very recently, almost completely copied from the French system. Roumania was a typical example of a unitary organization. The whole power of government was centralized in Bucharest. Practically all powers of local government were derived from the central authority, and were enlarged and contracted at the will of Bucharest. The whole system lent itself admirably to the domination of the National Liberal party, guided up to 1927 by Ion I. C. Brǎtianu, and after his death by his brother, Vintilǎ I. C. Brǎtianu, who died last year.Since the strength of the National Peasant party, which assumed the reins in 1928, lies largely in the provinces acquired at the close of the World War, a decentralization of government was to be expected. The bitter resentment of Maniu and his associates toward the over-centralization which favored the policies of the Bratianus forced the recent overhauling of the governmental structure, tending toward federalism—a form which takes cognizance of the differences of the past and present between the old kingdom and the new provinces and attempts to extend democratic features of self-rule to the electorate. At the same time, it attempts to secure bureaucratic expertness.

scholarly journals Canada’s history of failing to provide medical care for Indigenous children

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rakhshan Kamran
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
First Nations ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Current Status ◽  
House Of Commons ◽  
Canadian Government ◽  
Indigenous Children ◽  
History Of ◽  
Services And Supports

Abstract In December 2007, the House of Commons unanimously supported Jordan’s Principle, a commitment that all First Nations children would receive the health care products, social services, and supports, and education they need, in memory of Jordan River Anderson. However, the process of applying for Jordan’s Principle was convoluted and not transparent, leaving several cases not being responded to. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found the definition and implementation of Jordan’s Principle to be racist and discriminatory in 2016, ordering the Canadian government to make immediate changes. Failing to make changes to Jordan’s Principle, the Canadian government was found to be noncompliant with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal orders in 2018. This article provides one case example of Jordan’s Principle that was not responded to, details on the current status of Jordan’s Principle, and information on the recent implementation of the Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document