THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DOMINIONS      233
for enactment of laws by the initiative is valid.^1 The Chapter
argument is that the legislature is intended to enact    	1
what the people desire; if, therefore, a measure is pre-
pared and approved by the electorate, it is proper that
it should be passed by the legislature without the right
to alter or reject. The objection that a legislature is
intended to discuss and clarify the views of the elector-
ate may be met by two considerations. In the first
place, the bill prepared by initiative is discussed by
the legislature and may be rejected once; only then
does it go to a referendum., thus giving the electorate
the advantage of studying the legislature's opinions.
Secondly, an Act of 1923 enables the legislature to
decide several questions to be placed before the electors
at the referendum when the voting is preferential, thus
securing them a substantial measure of legislative
guidance. How much further this process could be
carried without finding the courts opposed, it is im-
possible to conjecture. A legislature for a Dominion,
it seems to be held, cannot properly extinguish itself,
so that presumably it cannot hand over all its powers
to another body, except by way of transforming itself
by a constitutional change, and in the case of the
Canadian provinces the power of change exists.
It is of course entirely within the power of any
legislature to decide that issues shall be settled by
referendum, or to allow local option as regards the
application of liquor control.^2 A classical example of
the two systems is afforded by New Zealand, where the
referandum has been employed triennially to decide
the issue of prohibition or continuance or governmental
^1 It. v. Nat Bdl Liquors, Ltd., [1922] 2 A.C. 128.
^2 Official Tear Book of the Commonwealth, xsii. 1005-8.