CO885-(11-13) — Page 46

3556.

MY LORD,

No. 750.

(NATAL.)

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

We are honoured with your Lordship's commands signified in Mr. Herbert's

-Temple, April 5, 1872. letter of the 30th of March ultimo, stating that with reference to our report of the 14th of March last,* upon a Bill passed by the Legislative Council of Natal for transferring certain lands held by the former Bishop of Cape Town and his successors to the bishop of Natal and his successors in trust for the English Church, he was directed by your Lordship to acquaint us that Mr. Domville, the Bishop of Natal's agent in England, had requested that if any hesitation should be felt as to giving the Royal Assent to the Bill in question, the advisors of the bishop might be permitted to appear before Her Majesty's Privy Council and state the grounds for its being sanctioned.

Mr. Herbert also stated that your Lordship was of opinion that the request should be complied with, and that you proposed therefore to take the necessary steps to have the matter referred to the Judicial Committee under the provisions of the 4th section of 3 & 4 Will. 4. c. 41. But before proceeding any further your Lordship would be glad to be favoured with our opinion whether we saw any objection to that course.

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

Report

That it is for your Lordship to determine upon the tribunal which in your judgment will best assist you in coming to a conclusion as to the advice to be tendered to Her Majesty upon the subject of this Bill. The questions raised by it would have seemed to us questions rather for the determination of the Privy Council as in the analogous cases of Bills framed by the Legislature of the Channel Islands than for the determina- tion of a tribunal almost exclusively legal., It is not an exposition of existing law which is in dispute, but what, under all the circumstances and in a very anomalous state of things, the law should be made for the future. But this is entirely for your Lordship

to decide.

It is undoubtedly a very fit case to be argued before some tribunal, and we need hardly add that the fullest notice should be given to all those persons who, in the South African Colonies, opposed the Bill of the intention of your Lordship to have the matter argued in order that the tribunal which is in effect to decide the case should have all the considerations on both sides of the question presented to it before coming to a con- clusion.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Kimberley,

&c.

&c.

We have, &c. (Signed)

J. D. COLERIDGE. G. JESSEL.

0

16278,-892. 25.-5/86.

&c.

• No. 748.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

1 | 2 | 3 |

Reference :-

C.O. 885

11 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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