Supreme Court of Canada
Chalmers et al. v. The King, [1933] S.C.R. 196
Date: 1932-10-19.
David Chalmers and Others v. The King
1932: October 19.
Present: Rinfret, Lament, Smith, Cannon and Crocket JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF KING’S BENCH, APPEAL SIDE, PROVINCE OF QUEBEC
Criminal law—Jurisdiction—Conflict of decisions—Seditious words—Joint indictment—Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1927, c. 36, sections 133, 133a enacted by 20-21 Geo. V, c. 11 and 134 re-enacted by 20-21 Geo. V, c. 11.
APPEAL by the appellants from the judgment of the Court of King’s Bench, appeal side, province of Quebec[1], dismissing the appeal from their conviction by a jury and
[Page 197]
their sentence by the Court of King’s Bench, criminal side, Wilson J., for the offence of speaking seditious words.
The appellants were granted special leave to appeal to this court by Smith J., in chambers, on the ground that, at first sight, the judgment appealed from apparently conflicted with a judgment of the Court of Appeal of Ontario in a case of The King v. Buck[2].
On the appeal to this court, after hearing argument of counsel, the Court delivered judgment orally, quashing the appeal for want of jurisdiction, on the ground that such conflict did not exist.
Appeal quashed.
M. Garber for the appellants.
D. P. Gillmor K.C. for the respondent.