CO885-(10-11) — Page 578

1328.

PUBLIC

ECORD OFFICE

61

Reference :-

THEC.O. 885

11 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

:

No. 455.

(JAMAICA.)

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

Lincoln's Inn, February 2, 1867. MY LORD,

We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Sir Frederic Rogers' letter of the 1st day of February instant, in which he stated that he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us for our consideration a copy of the Act of Indemnity, 29 Vict. o. 1., passed by the Legislature of Jamaica in November 1865; that this Act was in the usual manner left to its operation by Order in Council, but had not been confirmed by an Imperial Act.

M

Sir Frederic Rogers was pleased to say that a question has now been raised by Mr. Eyre as to the effect of this Act of Indemnity in proceedings against him, and in a letter to the Under Secretary, after stating that civil actions have been commenced against him for damages for alleged illegal capture and imprisonment, and that criminal prosecutions were about to be instituted upon charges of alleged murder, he goes on "A Bill of Indemnity was at once enacted by the Legislature of Jamaica, and has been left by Her Majesty's Government to its operation, but I now find there are some English Statutes, 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100., and the 42 George 3. c. 85., and some preceding Acts, which render it very questionable whether the Jamaica Act "of Indemnity is of any value unless confirmed by an English Act of Parliament."

Sir Frederic Rogers was pleased further to say that it is upon this question, both with reference to civil and criminal proceedings that your Lordship desires our opinion, and he was pleased to transmit, for our information, copies of a Report of the Law Officers made in June 1866,* and also of Mr. Cardwell's Despatch of the same month to Sir H. Storks, in which (at page 7) a further opinion of the same Law Officers is embodied, and to request that we would favour your Lordship with our opinion on the following questions —

1. Will the Jamaica Indemnity Act, though not confirmed by an Imperial Act, supply a defence to criminal proceedings, by way of indictment, or otherwise, brought against Mr. Eyre for an act committed by him when Governor, and which may be assumed to

be covered by the terms of the Indemnity Act?

2. Will the Indemnity Act, though not confirmed by an Imperial Act, supply a defence to a civil action for damages brought against Mr. Eyre in respect of an act committed by him when Governor, and which may be assumed to be covered by the terms of the Indemnity Act?

Sir Frederic Rogers was pleased to add that he was desired further to state that the matter was most urgent, and that your Lordship trusted we would be able to favour you with an answer by Saturday night (2nd instant).

In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have the honour to

Report

That in answer to Sir F. Rogers' letter, which, though dated yesterday, was received by us only at 3 o'clock this afternoon, we are of opinion, first, that the Jamaica Indemnity Act, though not confirmed by an Imperial Act, would supply a defence to criminal proceedings, by way of indictment or otherwise, brought against Mr. Eyre for an act committed by him when Governor, and which, by the question, is to be assumed to be covered by the terms of the Indemnity Act.

(2.) That the Indemnity Act, though not confirmed by an Imperial Act, will supply a defence to a civil action for damages brought against Mr. Eyre in respect of an act committed by him when Governor, and which, as before, is assumed to be covered by the terms of the Act.

We understand that the Jamaica Indemnity Act is valid in the Colony, without any confirmation by the Imperial Act, Order in Council, or otherwise, to give it full effect there. The Imperial Act could only be required to meet my doubt that may exist as to the accuracy of the opinions above expressed.

The questions are not so wholly free from doubt but that we should have been glad if an Imperial Act had settled them.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Carnarvon, &c.

&o.

We have, &c. (Signed)

&c.

• No. 414.

JOHN ROLT.

JOHN B. KARSLAKE.

• 16976-991.

25.--5/46.