he has already been referred.
Briefly, his
arguments for continuing with the preparation
of a chronological edition are:-
(1)
The urgent need of revision and the
delay which a new arrangement would
entail.
(2) The difficulty of making a satisfactory
rearrangement with 12-15 years of
amendments and additions to incorporate.
(3) The desirability of preparing a
comprehensive index.
intinton
As regards (1) the need for a revision was
just as urgent even more so and moreover
-
in Ceylon there is a much bigger bar to
convert to the new system and it may be
assumed, I think, that the bar there is just
as conservative in these matters as other bars.
Further, there has been little delay in the
preparation of the edition once the decision to
change the system was taken, as I understand
that the new edition is now practically ready
for issue.
As regards (2) there was also in Ceylon
15 years of amendments and additions to
incorporate and the bulk of the legislation
involved could be no less than in Hong Kong.
As regards (3) a comprehensive index is
necessary whether the edition is arranged by
chapters or chronologically.
In the circumstances, however, and
despite the demonstrable weakness of Mr Fraser's
arguments, I really do not see how we can press
for a change at this stage of the revision.
The enclosures referred to in the last
paragraph