CO885-(11-13) — Page 341

13,496.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

CO. 885

MY LORD,

No. 114.

(CAPE OF GOOD HOPE.)

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

Temple, 9th November 1876. We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Mr. Malcolm's letter of the 26th April last, stating that he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us a copy of papers recently laid before Parliament on the subject of a proposed conference of delegates on the affairs of South Africa.

That we would learn from your Lordship's Despatch to the Governor of the Cape of No. 31, Good Hope of the 22nd January last, printed at page 86 of the Papers, and from the March 24, annexed copy of Sir Henry Barkly's reply, that it was proposed that the President of 1876. the Orange Free State should visit England for the purpose of conferring with your Lordship on certain questions then pending between this country and the Republic.

That your Lordship was in hopes that the result of your discussions with President Brand would be to conclude an agreement with him upon certain territorial and other questions which had long been in dispute between this country and the Orange Free State; but, as the discussions would take place in this country, where your Lordship holds the office of one of Her Majesty's Secretaries of State, your Lordship was not aware that it was necessary or desirable that you should receive any formal commission or appointment from Her Majesty as Plenipotentiary to deal with Mr. Brand.

That it might, however, deserve consideration whether, in the event of any settle- ment of the questions in dispute being agreed upon at the Conference, it would not be open to the Free State to repudiate the arrangement thereafter unless made under the hands of fully empowered representatives, and your Lordship would be obliged by our favouring you with our opinion whether you needed or should be invested with any formal authorisation to negotiate or act.

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

Report

We regret very much that so great a delay should have taken place in giving your Lordship our opinion, but we think that your Lordship required no extraordinary authority or formal authorisation to negotiate or act.

The subject-matter was one within Her Majesty's Royal prerogative, and we think the acts done by your Lordship must be considered as done by Her Majesty.

As is pointed out in a judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench in Harrison v. Bush, 5 E. & B., 352, the office of Secretary of State is one of very ancient date, and was originally conferred upon one person. In more modern times, however, for the con- venience of the division of the public business into departments, several secretaries were appointed; but we think, in point of law, each is capable of discharging the duties of all, and we are therefore of opinion that it would not be competent to the Free State to repudiate any arrangement made by your Lordship upon the ground that you were not fully empowered to enter into negotiations.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Carnarvon,

&c.

&c.

&c.

We have, &c.,

(Signed)) JOHN HOLKER.

HARDINGE S. GIFFARD.

▲ 19916.-113. 25.-12/84.

12 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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