132
8.
The first knowledge I had of these legal proceedings arose from the Minute of the Acting Colonial Secretary dated 21st. February, 1900, when I was asked to answer the Land Officer's question as to "what process of Law was available to Crown Lessees to protect their Crown Leased grounds from piracy in order that Grants of Crown Leases signed by His Excellency and issued from the Land Office may be properly safeguarded ?" I then made some en- quiries about the matter and wrote my Minute of 29th. February, 1900 9.
My Minute was as follows (to the Honourable Colonial Secretary) "I take it the Lessee woull have to bring an action of trespass and conversion. This has been done in the Summary Court. The Petition in Court was filed on 26th. February and I am waiting to see the Answer and whether the Defendants' Counsel tries to raise the question of the right of the Crown to grant such Leases. If you will kindly return these papefs to me I will get a copy of the Defendants' Answer when it is filed. Till the Case is decided I should grant no more of these Leases. Indeed, in any case, I doubt whether it would not be more expedient to issue Licenses at a proper fee to those desirous of dredging for Coral, Shells &c. and passing an Ordinance preventing unlicensed persons from dredging.”
(Sa.) W. Meith Goodman.
23.8.1900.-
10.-
I am now sorry the papers were not sent back to me. The Answer was not filed till 16th. Varch, I had nothing specially to remind me of the matter. I had no notice when the case was to come on, or that it was to be heard by the Pull Court, and it was not till I saw one of our ordinary local Newspapers reports of the case having been heard on 23rd. May that I saw that some alleged customary right on the part of Chinese fishermen to dredge for Coral and Shells in the locus in quo and adjacent parts had been set up. On Saturday 30th. June, the Judgment of the Chief Justice was reported in the Newspaper and on Monday July 2nd, the Judgment of the Acting Puisne Judge. These Judgments appear to have been delivered on Friday 29th. June.
11.
The Chief Justice near the end of bis Judgment says *I regret the Crown was not represented at the hearing since the validity of the Lease granted by it to the Plaintiffs has been called in question". It would have been easy for the Court when it found out this at the hearing to have directed that notice should have been given to the Crown Solicitor or to have asked the parti- es whether such notice had been given.
It was too late when the Judgment has been given
for the Attorney-General to appear.“ 13.
Passing to the Judgments themselves I observe that the Puiane Judge finds in favour of the Plaintiffs while the Chief Justice finds: for the Defendants. In these circumstances the Chief- Justice has a "double or casting vote" in virtue of Section 19 of Ordinance 12 of 1973.-
ジ
13.