TICI,omeni::10 noianding: dat
COPY.
.Y 40%
Trade75e2 İkirole) .mail
bersino wld el edad? © TAJ67085 and Vd 2 Jre we ejus brest wil
I .eomwiko noirivoll Lane.el and adri beouhendri med sval dotuqeeb -ceoen od of baut ausd evan pole to eat a beouborðri oels evad
ydi) mooivod" baðuð İdadue even I "podrill" to zoiðiniteb silk mI
*shi mool*od* 101 *** I
doide bebbs need nad airollet and *#*u*0* to notrinito en RI ainui gairtetnuo ameijoer quos jim ai yaw sad to veiv ni yasam9090 ei -:bestarb ere adwo0 sit ne neitoi be -ni grandioo a gridsolli stuur yns to sumenda edð ai bra”
JHOLIJOBES VIs ni od barestez coidsibatus, add molded-
."#two) alerqu2 suð yd bentorere ed Iurie
*
.4.2 mi od boorja an 86 .s to (3) noites-due bedolab onla oval I .ddiweten bemutar INGMJ
somenib70 am to di .8 die gallseb mubistona Ixiooge e zemne I
„fod,cob s'aded to end wreed add to O dostgate si of bennelc
JJogj£4 T 1 (M)
*
.stor
C
8191
Memorandum on s. 15 of the Interpretation Ordinance,
R18 MAR 12
340
1911.
This section was introduced to meet a difficulty to
which my attention was first called in Kauritius, and which I have occasionally come across since. It often happens that an Imperial Act is referred to in an Ordinance either by its regnal year and chapter, or by its short title, which also gives the year of its passing. Thus, to refer to the case which arose in Mauritius, an old Ordinance refer- -red to "the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854"; the section enables the Court to read*1894" for *1854*. This gives the simple case; but in the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, s. 745 (1) (c) provides that "any document referring to any Act or enactment hereby repealed shall be construed to refer to this Act..." These words unfortunately do not go quite far enough to cover Colonial Ordinances; but, as I think I pointed out at the time, it might very well be that in the future, the omission which I consider a serious one, might be supplied, and a statute which repealed or amended an enactment which applies to the Colonies might
(as I think it should) make the new statute take the place of the
repealed statute where it is referred to in Colonial Ordinances. S. 15
therefore lays down the general principle, but the words "unless there
is any provision in the repealing statute from which the contrary
intention shall appear* are inserted as a saving clause in case the
Imperial legislation intended that the general principle should not
apply. It will be seen from this explanation that there is no Ordinanc
of the Colony from which they contrary intention could be deduced.
(Sd.) F. T Piggott.
16th.. February, 1912.