1
01-405 7641 Ext.
Communications on this subject should
be added to
THE AL SECRETARY
ATTORNEY General's CHAMBERS
SECRET
-2-
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S CHAMBERS,
LAW OFFICERS' DEPARTMENT,
ROYAL Courts of JusticE,
LONDON, W.C.2.
ranging discussion last Friday. I have only a few, very minor,
comments to make on it, principally to give a slightly different
emphasis to the views attributed to me at particular points, or to
bring out more clearly the thinking behind those views.
(i) Your paragraph 2(d)
The reason why I think that the Royal Instructions would need to be expressed in the terms you describe is that they would be (as Griffiths and I see it) incompatible with the 1898 Order in Council and the Letters Patent and it would need to be made clear that they overrode those two existing laws.
(ii) Your paragraph 2(e)
I should like it to be clear that I remain to be con- vinced by the argument advanced in the last sentence of this paragraph which needs to be more thoroughly explored before it can be relied on. In effect, therefore, I want to register a more substantial questionmark against that sentence than appears on the face of your minute.
(iii) Your paragraph 2(f)
This is
What I have just said about the last sentence of your paragraph 2(e) applies exactly to the second sentence of this paragraph.
(iv) Your paragraph 2(h)
I think that the third sentence of this paragraph is perhaps over-condensed. What worried me was the proposition that Ministers should be invited to take a decision now on the basis that, if it caused problems in the future, they could and would solve those problems by legislating politiin point then, notwithstanding that it is impossible to predict now
in what circumstances that legislation might have to be made and defended.
them in
содив
SECRET
/(v)