4
1162/04
#
1. is submitted that the words "disposed of for Her Majesty's service mean only a conveyance as contemplated in the preamble, i.e., a conveyance by the officers of the Ordnance to such other public officer as may be indicated by Order in Council. As the grantor had vested the estate for ever in the Ordnance, it was necessary to insert words giving to the grantee the power of passing it to another Department; hence the words
disposed of for Her Majesty's service."
If it is possible to construe the words as contended for the War Department, it is also possible to construe them as we contend. Then the construction which would defeat the manifest intention of the grantor must be rejected, and that which gives effect to the intention must be adopted.
It is sufficient to show that under the grant there is no power to sell to a private person; but it may be added that if it is held no such right exists, then the Colonial Government has strong equitable grounds for claiming restitution of the property. The land was vested in the Queen as part of Her Colonial Domain, for the benefit of her subjects in this Colony. It is no longer required for the service for which it was granted, and the taxpayers of the United Kingdom should not benefit by it any more than the taxpayers of this Colony benefit by the sale of Crown lands in the United Kingdom.
September 16, 1886.
(Signed) LIONEL COX,
Procureur-General.
The Law Officers of the Crown are requested to advise the Secretary of State for
War-
1. Whether the sale to Mr. Pouguet of the old military hospital, Port Louis, has been legally effected? And if not
2. What course should be taken by the Secretary of State as to the application of the proceeds of sale, having reference to his claim to be reimbursed sums expended by him in maintaining and improving the property?
Opinion.
1. In our opinion the sale to Mr. Pouguet of the old military hospital at Port Louis has not been legally effected.
2. The Secretary of State should endeavour to make some arrangement as to the proceeds of sale with the Colonial Government. He has no legal claim to be re- imbursed any sums expended by him in maintenance and improvement; but as to the latter (viz., the sums expended in improvement) he has a fair ground for consideration.
Royal Courts of Justice, December 8, 1886.
(Signed)
RICHARD E. WEBSTER. EDWARD CLARKE.
MY LORD W letter of t case of t from the seized by the Unite territory
That sl and Fanni forward & Governme That it Natalie" Governme made upo declined t American
That or
mercial, of
Sir E. Hei claimed b further to
of Great from the C That Si opinion as Cays was i be made b
on behalf inquiry, be their vesse
In obedi
That, up the Pedro Governmer
United Sta
46
'Natalie."
But befo "Natalie,"
to state or Cays to app by Her Ma
The Most &c
0
79871.-