مجھے
27A
manifest that he must be invested by the
Supreme Civil Authority with certain powers.
This, in the generality of cases, is arranged
for by an Order in Council and beyond that
nothing was intended or can indeed be fairly.
inferred from the text".
3. It appears to Mr Harcourt, quite
apart from the evidence contained in these
memoranda, that this limitation is necessary
in any case for the application of the
provisions of the Army Act to the Civil
population of a
1% ndead! Colony, or indeed) camp
followers generally,
as a consideration of
the penal provisions of the Act which
are capable of such application appears
Thus with regard to Section 9
to show.
of the Act "disobedience to lawful commands",
to which paragraph 3 of the War Office letter
appears to refer, it is admitted in Note 6
to that section on page 387 of the Manual
if it in
of Military Law, that the command to be lawful"
must be one relating to military duty. It
would appear, therefore, that in the
case of civilians the command
betw-
must be issued under circumstances
which bring the civilian into actual'
contact with military operations or
discipline. For the same reasons it
appears to ir Harcourt that section 10
as to quarrels and affrays, section 18
and
as to drunkenness section 38 as to
duelling and suicide, must be similarly
limited in their application and these
arguments apply even more strongly to
section 41 (offences punishable by
ordinary law) since this section would,
if applied to the civil population
without the restriction above mentioned,
practically oust the civil administra-
tion altogether.
4. I am to observe that on this
construction the Urder in Council
would not appear to give the General
Officer
would