R v Smithers [1912] HCA 96

ae

16 C.L.R.] OF AUSTRALIA. 99

Barton J. Iam clearly of opinion that within the meaning H- ©. cr A. of the Public Service Act 1883 the petitioner was appointed to es the service after the passing of Act No. 710, and that is a fatal = bar to his claim. I would add that it seems to me that the reasons given by the Supreme Court Judges are conclusive, and need no further indorsement on our part.

While it is not for this Court to make recommendations to the Crown, still it is open to me to say that this is a case of evident hardship.

T agree that the appeal will have to be dismissed.

CasEY

v. Tue Kixe.

Barton J.

Isaacs J. I agree with what has been said both as to the hardship and as to the law.

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Solicitors, for the appellant, Snowball & Kaufmann.

Solicitor, for the respondent, Guinness, Crown Solicitor for Victoria. Bala

Se Gy foe ee Be

(HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.]

THE KING against SMITHERS.

Ex parte BENSON. H.C. or A. 1912. —

Constitutional law—Power of State to exclude undesirable persons—Freedom of YDNEY,

" intercourse" —Police power—Limits of power—Discrimination between resi- S¥ dents of different States—The Constitution (63 & 64 Vict. c. 12), secs. 92, 107, pte 23, 117—Influz of Criminals Prevention Act 1903 (N.S. W.) (No. 6 of 1903), sec. 3.

Griffith C.J., The Influx of Criminals Prevention Act 1903 (N.S.W.), by sec. 3, provides Barton and

MENA Mifuay person (other than 4 perton who has-been resident in New '*°**: South Wales at or prior to the commencement of this Act), has before or Dec. 16, 17, after such commencement, been convicted in any other State . . . of an 20. offence for which in such State he was liable to suffer death, or to be gino, imprisoned for one year or longer; and if before the lapse of three years Barton

Isaacs at after the termination of any imprisonment suffered by him in respect of any Higgins JJ.