CONFIDENTIAL
4.
2.
In 1961, the Attorney General
(Mr. Ridehalgh) minuted to the effect that the J.P. and Chamber nominations were 'by convention only'.
5.
We have carefully reconsidered our position in the light of these historical researches and Denys Roberts has advised:
11
There is thus nothing in the 'constitu- tional documents' which have governed us since 1917 which requires that there should be a 'representative (whether this nomination is by means of an election or otherwise) of the Justices of the Peace or of the Chamber of Commerce.
The fact that the Governor may have appointed representatives of the two bodies for a long time does not in law, oblige him to continue to do so. If it had been intended to impose such an obligation, this should have been included in the 1917 Letters Patent or Royal Instructions. It is not, and in law we do not need to go behind these documents.
??
It is worth noting that the 1883 letter says that for the future an Unofficial Member of the Legislative Council will as a general rule be appointed on the nomination of the Justices of the Peace. For what it is worth, this phrase can be said to show that the letter was not meant to impose on the Governor an invariable duty either to accept any particular nominee or to have to appoint a representative of the Justices of the Peace.
CONFIDENTIAL