the Minister should have transferred to him merchant
shipping functions under "enactments" as defined in the
Order, and we see no objection on general grounds to this.
in clarese 213) If this is done, we could include reference to payment
of compensation for requisition or acquisition of ships
in Əluase 2(3) of the Order, required but because necessary, unless/provision for such compensation is made worsmenn minnet) by Defence Regulation The descriptions
But we dont whatten the additional words are But thig would not be Lui Hong belong
n
in amy
care
of the functions concerned, however, inve now become rather
involved, and we think it would be better to use the
expression "merchant shipping functions" and define it in
Clause 2 of the Order. He wound in us suggest the
though
would
omission of the last six words in your proposed amendment
essential
since they do not appear to be negeggury, and as there is
no definition of "emergency powers" their effect would be
uncertain.
which are und` covered
by the definition ["emailment","
(b) Paragraph 3. I am not sure that these financial
difficulties to which you refer will arise in effect since
under Hong Kong legislation, including Defence Regulations,
money would be payable only out of Hong Kong funds, and the
transfer of functions to the Minister of War Transport would
ie
not necess
ecessary transfer liability to U.K. funds except in so
far as any liability would fell on them previously.
*
an advises that
(c) Paragraph 4. Te are doubtful whether the amendment
is not possible
you suggest would meet the case since wi
sovare to the
Merchant Shipping tet, 1894, this Order cannot amend an Act
not aware
any relevant uistverment which would
come
within
that defunction
of Parliament, or can it amend an Order under an Act unless then is express
and that power is invoked,
power to do so/ie povoked.
no
The Merchant Shipping icts are could, under Sub-section (2) of
declare some officer to be the
to be recited in the Order, it
Section 4 of the Act of 1894,
Registrar of British ships for Hong Kong under that Section,
is
but it appears doubtful whether any purpose would be served in
doing this since it appears that the Registrar must be in
21
seems & us that
Hong Kong. This Order cannot touch Section 89 of the Act,
can
although it may be possible to do what you consider necessary
(see (d) below) by Defence Regulation/ We could, of course, extend Clause 2(2) to Part I of the ..ct of 1932 as applied to Hong Kong by Order in
Council