I have nothing whatever to say against
Mr. Alabaster personally I believe he is a
very competent Lawyer but I am against his
-
appointment as Attorney General of Hong Kong for
the following reasons:
-
(1) Sir J.Kemp (who began his career as
a Cadet in Hong Kong in 1898) was Attorney General
from 1915 to 1930, and is now Chief Justice. If
Mr.Alabaster, who went to Hong Kong in 1909 and
has made his career there, is now appointed
Attorney General, which will create a sort of
tradition that the higher legal posts in Hong Kong
must be reserved for men with Hong Kong experience.
This would be contrary to the recent pronouncement
at the Colonial Office Conference in favour of the
unification of the Colonial Service, which implies
that members of the Legal Branch of the Service in
other Colonies should have a chance of transfer
to Hong Kong if their legal qualifications are
sufficient.
(2) With regard to the general question
involved, whether a high legal post in a Colony
should be given to a man who is not in the Service,
I may remind you that in the recent case of the
Chief Justiceship of Ceylon, when a proposal (which
did not originate within this Office) was made for
the appointment of Mr. Barrington Ward, K. C., a
distinguished member of the English Bar, it was
turned down by the Secretary of State. In the
case of an Attorney Generalship, a man who has
been practising not at the English Bar but in the
Colony might, it appears to me, on occasion be
embarrassed in the execution of his duties by the
legal ties and associations resulting from 21 years'
practice