Cirrus@Austlit

'Until World War II provoked a major rethinking of Australian federalism, the working relationships between the national and State levels of the Australian state evolved as a series of solutions to particular problems facing Australia, such as stopping the spread of influenza and ameliorating war veterans’ poverty. In this issue we publish two articles that continue this theme of ‘intergovernmental relations’. Mark Finnane takes us back to the High Court decision known as ‘Smithers’ (1913) in order to reveal how constitutional lawyers, before and after that case, considered the authority of a State of Australia. Could New South Wales police prevent a criminal from entering from another State? On one view, federation (Sections 92 and 117 of the Australian constitution) had ended or weakened such State power, and yet the federal compact had not given a ‘police power’ (or a police force) to the national government. As Finnane shows, one issue in this debate was the scope of ‘police power’. Among Australian jurists who had been following the development of constitutional law in the United States, ‘police power’ referred to the ‘fundamental responsibilities of State governments to protect the health and welfare of their populations’. Future emergencies are likely to recreate public mandates for States to wield authority so broadly conceived, Finnane concludes.' (Publication summary)