CO537-35 — Page 218

on

213.

217

M. worderck G

19th December 1903. There are the dates. There is no ques-

-tion about them. It is just to satisfy yourself.

Shelton Hooper:- I think you see the drift of my questions that on the 19th 13 38

Hoongri-

133

it became law, on the 24th/the Public were informed that it

24th

had become law and on the 31st, one week after, the Standing

Orders made under the Ordinance we are now informed aro

1

believed not to have been in force because the power had

been taken away by that Ordinance from the Board of making

such Standing Orders. That is why I have been so particular.

about the dates ?

A: Yes, in my opinion I believe that they were not in force

because under Ordinance 23 of 1903, Section 5, there is no

Q:-

1589

At-

Q:- 1540

►

power for the Board to make Standing Orders.

You mean to say the power had been taken over from them by 1334

that Ordinance ?

Ies, I believe that the power was taken away from them by

the passing of Ordinance 23 of 1903

And yet, notwithstanding that, a week later the Board nade 1340

these Standing Orders or confirmed them on 31st December ?

Yes, I am still of the opinion.

You are still of that opinion knowing these facts and dates ?(341

A:-

1341

A:

Q:- 1349

Q:-

Yes.

That is as far as I want to carry that. I might put one

1342

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference:-

C.O. 537

35

RECORD OFFICE, LONDON OUT PERMISSION OF THE PUBLIC REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHICALLY WITH COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH - NOT TO BE

question more. The Standing Orders we have been alluding to

are those

1

Secretary

#

for the guidance of the Secretary and assistant

I believe on the same day Standing Orders were

made for the guidance of other Officers and servants of the

Sanitary Department ?

Yes, for officers. I won't say other Officers and servants.

1349 28- Very well, I think that is near enough. And, therefore, they 1343

are null and void air: ?