#\erant JBİnstaque 194 PCY.
stated in paragraph é of your despatch that magistrates would be responsible to the Chief Justice so far as their judicial work is concerned; and I am disposed to think that they should also be under his control in matters of discipline. In any event you will no doubt agree that the authority of the Chief Justice and the Attorney-General in this matter should be precisely
defined.
6. As regards the interchangeability of Legal Officers between the posts of Ragistrate, Crown Counsel and Avsistant Registrar-General, I understand that, although the two branches of the legal profession ere, in private practice, separate in kong Kong, there will be no difficulty about appointing solicitors as Crown Counsel; and that it is also the intention that, if administrative convenience requires this, barristers may have to serve for periods as assistent Registrars-General. It may be that this last liability may prove some deterrent to the recruitment of barristers as Legal Officers, but I agree that in offers to candidates for appointment as Legal officers in hong kong it should be made clear that the appointee will be liable if called upon to serve as Crown Counsel, Magistrate or Assistant Registrar-eneral.
In paragraph 12 of your despatch, the amount "C1,755" appears to be a clerical error for "£1,830".
7. Finally, with reference to paragraph 15, it is, no doubt, fully appreciated that members of the Colonial Legal Service employed in Hong Kong are eligible, and in fact considered, for promotion elsewhere; and that those in the service of other territories are similarly eligible for promotion to super-scale posts in Hong Kong.
I have the honour to be
sir,
Your most obedient,
humble servant,
Fee A Crooch Jones,
: