§ MR. W. PRITCHARD MORGANI beg to ask the Attorney General whether the same prerogative pertains to the Crown with reference to the gold and silver contained in Her Majesty's possessions outside as in Great Britain; if the prerogative does exist, is it the intention of the Government to insist 1848 upon the payment of royalties outside as in Great Britain; and if the prerogative does not exist, how and by what statute or law has the prerogative outside Great Britain been abrogated or modified?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir R. WEBSTER, Isle of Wight)The Prerogative of the Crown is the same in all parts of Her Majesty's dominions. The exercise of it as gold and silver is modified as regards New South Wales and Queensland by the Act 18 & 19 Vic., c. 54 sec. 2; as to Victoria by the Act 18 and 19 Vic., c. 55, sec. 2; and as to Western Australia by the Act of last year, 53 & 54 Vic., c. 26, sec. 3. These sections vest in the Legislatures of the several colonies named, the entire management and control of the waste lands of the Crown and the proceeds thereof, including all royalties, mines, and minerals. I trust that this information, as showing the course that has been taken in Australia, will satisfy the hon. Member.
§ MR. W. PRITCHARD MORGANNo, Sir; quite the contrary. What I desire to know is whether the general words in the Acts of Parliament referred to by the hon. and learned Gentleman have vested in the Colonial Legislature and in the Colonial Governments the gold and silver in the colonies?
§ SIR R. WEBSTERI do not think the hon. Gentleman really followed my answer. I mentioned the statutes where the rights of the Crown have been interfered with. In cases in which no Statutes have been passed the rights will still remain with the Crown.