5
Thave never said that they should
In so regarded.
11.09
I feel
children
Jane
doubt whattion step- informally addplènd
children shoves
cantruction
109
h
on a strictly legal
regarded
し
and "daughters" (Saho.
I 149) for the prepon ym
The any legal
general mling
to
opinion seems to io that of M. Duncan
Jermy minute klow.
on
36794
which
was
prin for the
1.D.
purposes
of that
Care
only
Mr. Duncan
you should see.
M: Robarts-Wray.
My minute of 6/5/30 on 36794 (Gonsalus)
attacker was not a ruling or au
to the Effect that an
opinion
informally adopted
Child was, from the stricth, legal point of view, a child for the purposes of Col. Res.!!!!
All thad in mind was thear
wi the
particular circumstances of that case, there was no objection to the Sofs. Constring
One of his own regulations ui manner if he desired to do so.
a
lilmal
be the cricumstances tam not sure
(SEE NOI. on this file)
that it is necessay to to into the matter from f the strictt, legal point of view. All