Has to go to Chancery. The colonies are established by Letters Patent so any dispute between the colonies is actually only resolvable by reference to the Chancery in the first instance (to the mid 19th century) because it relates to actions of the Crown in establishing the colony in the first place noone else can make a binding decision.Yes, and Parliament is probably going to get sick of spending a great deal of time adjudicating disputes between different colonies (not all of which will be matters for the courts; and even where the courts initially become involved, there is a distinct possibility of Parliament stepping in and creating a different outcome) and regulating intercolonial commerce and doing all of the other day-to-day work that managing a large empire entails instead of worrying about Europe or expanding the Empire as a whole or so on and so forth. Which was my point. Having Parliament and British courts be the only supra-colonial layer of government is unworkable because it puts too great a load on British institutions to take care of everything directly, especially as the Empire grows and multiplies the amount of work they have to do. They need to create intermediate levels of government, for much the same reason that generals have subordinates instead of having the Commander-in-Chief try to directly command every single individual soldier.
If you had bothered reading what I actually wrote, you would have noticed that I only said, "This may not lead to the formation of a single unified North American dominion (and even if it did some peripheral colonies would likely opt out, as Newfoundland and New Zealand did), but it is likely to result in the federalization of many of the colonies into fewer and larger units than was the case in 1775."
The point is that the status quo of having fifteen or sixteen separate colonies all directly subordinate from London was not one that could be sustained in the long run. Some degree of consolidation would be necessary to alleviate administrative stress and allow the British government as a whole to focus on other areas of interest. This does not necessarily mean the formation of a single super-dominion, but you are most likely not going to see British North America merrily bumbling along for the next two hundred years exactly the same as it was as some people on this thread seem to think.
One thing people, especially americans, don't quite get is this. A Bill in the US system starts 'Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Congress Assembled' nothing about the President in that he can veto,
In the British system the equivalent is
BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
Now one of the complaints of the American colonies was the King refusing Assent to bills but that depends on their pretention that the House of Burgess of Virginia is the Equal of Parliament See Declatory Act 'Parliament Hath Has and Ought to Have etc.'. . Royal Assent was last refused in1708 on the Scotch Militia Bill.
Once the Crown has done something only the Crown can change it ( or by the time of the American Revolution the Crown in Parliament)
But anything within a particular colony happens they are able to deal with it themselves ( ok there are mid 19th century issues that lead to the Colonial Law Validity Act) but that specifically empowers the colonies to establish their own legislature and judiciary and if several want to act in concert to establish a common court of jurisdiction for several matters nothing to stop them provided all the parties agree to it and nothing done is Repugnant to the Laws of England.
Again Mansfield, clever and careful bloke that he was in Campbell v Hall
- A country conquered by the British arms becomes part of the possessions and dominions of the King in right of the Crown of the United Kingdom; and, therefore, necessarily subject to the jurisdiction of Parliament.
- The conquered inhabitants once received the King's protection, become the King's subjects in all respects.
- The law of a colony equally affects all persons and all property there: "Englishmen" have no privilege in the colony distinct from the conquered inhabitants of the colony.
- The King has power to make laws for the conquered country without the concurrence of Parliament (except that this legislation is subordinate to his own authority in Parliament so that he cannot make any new change contrary to fundamental principles such as exempting an individual from the power of Parliament).
- Once the King has irrevocably granted a territory a representative assembly to concur in law making, he can no longer legislate by decree or impose taxation without them.