6045.
2
2 and 3. Making of Regulations, Rules, Scale of Fees.—Making of Orders as to manner aud places of Punishment
These can be made by the High Commissioner, although he is not at the time within the limits of the Order.
4 and 5. Making of Orders of Prohibition and Removal.—Deportation.
At the time of making these Orders the High Commissioner should, in our opinion, be within the limits of the Order.
6. Confirmation and Remission of Sentences.
These duties can be performed by the High Commissioner, although he is not within the limits of the Order.
If the matters referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5 are of sufficiently frequent occur rence to make it of importance, we think a further Order in Council should be made, enabling the High Commissioner to perform these duties, although he is not at the time within the limits of the Order.
The Right Hon. Lord Knutsford,
&c.
&c.
&c.
We have, &c., (Signed) RICHARD E. WEBSTER.
EDWARD CLARKE.
MY LORD,
No. 116.
(TRINIDAD.)
LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.
Royal Courts of Justice, March 28, 1888. We were honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Mr. Edward Wingfield's letter of the 9th instant, stating that he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us a copy of a Despatch from the Governor of Trinidad, enclosing a memorandum by the Attorney-General of the Colony, with a statement of the facts relative to the conditions as to resuming land for roads contained in Crown grants, and to request that we would favour your Lordship with our opinion on the questions submitted.
In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have the honour to
Report
(i.) That in our opinion it is competent for the Governor representing the Crown to resume lands under the conditions contained in the grants for roads without proceedings being taken under the Ordinance 16 of 1849, or under the Ordinances 29 of 1869 and 11 of 1869.
(ii.) The powers of resumption are limited by the words of reservation in the grant, and only extend to cases where works of public utility or convenience are contemplated. This would not cover the case of a track made simply for the convenience of a private adjoining owner, although the use of such track when made might not be forbidden to the public; nor would it entitle the Crown to resume, for the purpose of making a road to give access to Crown lands, unless such road would be or eventually become a road of substantial public convenience.
(iii.) We note that the form of the injunction is against the defendants, their servants, contractors, and all others, from trespassing upon that part of track B. which passes through (ie., over) the lands of the Plaintiff.
The question as to the right of the Governor to resume the site of road B. was not properly before the Chief Justice in the action of Francis v. Jackson and another, and the words in the injunction "all others" have no practical effect upon the rights of the Governor to resume possession.
ધ
The Right Hon. Lord Knutsford,
We have, &c.,
(Signed)
RICHARD E. WEBSTER.
EDWARD CLARKE.
&c.
&c.
&c.
▲ 52950.-16. 25.-4/88.
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
To Tz Li
C.O.
Reference :-
885
13 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO