CO885-(15-16) — Page 615

R

by the Imperial Acts, the operation of which in the Union could then be suspended by Order in Council.

The effect of adopting course (b) would be, that persons in custody under the Act would only be lawfully in custody while within the territory of the Union itself, and, therefore, unless this difficulty is negligible in practice, course (a) is the proper course to adopt. If the difficulty is negligible in practice the choice between (a) and (b) is a question of policy merely.

(3) That as to the South African Protectorates, the existing Imperial Extra- dition Acts cannot be applied to these as they are not "British possessions." The Protectorate Ordinances have no extraterritorial effect. There is; therefore, no provision for the conveyance in custody of a prisoner beyond the territory of the Protectorate. It seems to us to be eminently desirable that, if, as suggested by us in (2), Imperial legislation is resorted to, power should be taken to apply the Extra- chition Acts to Protectorates.

The Right Honourable

Lewis Harcourt, M.P.,

&c., &c., &c.

We have, &c.,

RÜFUS D. ISAACS. JOHN SIMON.

34869

No. 148.

(STRAITS SETTLEMENTS.)

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

[Questions regarding the payment of stamp duty on transfer in the Colony of a foreign ship to the British flag.]

SIR,

Royal Courts of Justice,

17

27th October, 1911. We were honoured with your commands signified in Mr. G. V. Fiddes's letter of the 4th August last stating that he was directed by you to transmit to us a despatch from the Governor of the Straits Settlements with regard to the payment of stamp duty on the transfer in the Colony of a foreign ship to the British flag. That it would appear that two separate questions were involved, namely:-

(1) Whether the bill of sale executed in the case referred to by the Governor could be regarded as an "instrument used for carrying into effect Part I. of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, and (2) whether Section 721 of that Act was intended to have effect outside the United Kingdom. That the second point was one of considerable importance since the enactment under reference would appear (subject to the provisions of Section 735) to interfere with the right of the self-governing Dominions as well as of the Crown Colonies to control their own fiscal arrangements. That you would, therefore, be glad if we would take the papers into our consideration and favour you with our opinion :-

(1) Whether Section 721 of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1894 had effect

outside the United Kingdom?

-

(2) If so, whether the bill of sale transferring a foreign ship to the British flag in the Straits Settlements was to be regarded as an instrument used for carrying out Part I. of that Act?

We have taken the matter, into our consideration and have the honour to

Report-

That in our opinion Section 721 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, 'is not intended to take effect outside the United Kingdom.

The general presumption is that an Act of Parliament is not designed to operate beyond the territorial limits of the United Kingdom unless a contrary intention is either expressed or to be inferred from the subject-matter. There are no express words applying the provisions of Section 721 outside the United Kingdom, such and the subject-matter, so far from raising an inference to that effect, rebuts inference.

any

(2) Part I. of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, deals only with ships which are British-owned and has nothing to do with an instrument transferring a foreign ship to a British owner. The bill of sale, therefore, is not an instrument used for carrying out Part I. of that Act.

We have, &c.,

RUFUS D. ISAACS.

JOHN SIMON.

The Right Honourable

Lewis Harcourt, M.P.,

&c.,

&c.,

&c.

(21790-2,) Wt. 06-481, 25. 11,11, D & 8,

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

C.O.8

Reference :-

.885

16 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

| ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE

BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

| COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

2