CO885-(15-16) — Page 77

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

PLLC.O. 885

15 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

2

loans which could be regarded as having priority over these Debentures, except the loans under the Colonial Loans Act; that other previous loans had been issued under the Inscribed Stock Law, No. 13, of 1885, and the Local Inscribed Stock Law, No. 27, of 1891, and the Local Inscribed Stock Law, 1891, Amendment Law, 1894, No. 33, of 1894, and under Laws authorising the particular issues, similar to Law No. 20 of 1892.

That copies of these Laws were enclosed; and it had always been held that issues made under these Legislative provisions ranked pari passu with all other issues, except such as came within the provisions of the Colonial Loans Act of 1899, and not according to the date of issue.

That Sir F. Ommanney was to request that we would take the papers submitted into our consideration, and favour you with our opinion on the following points:-

1. (a) Whether any, and (if so) which of the charges created by the Jamaica Laws Nos. 1, 2, 36, and 39 of 1900, or (b) whether any, and, if so, which of the charges assumed in respect of the advances actually made by the Treasury under those Laws, rank in priority as a charge upon the general revenue and assets of the Colony of Jamaica over the charges created by the Debentures issued, or to be issued, under Law 28 of 1899 ?

2. If, in our opinion, any of the charges above-mentioned had such priority, should the existence of such prior charges have been referred to in the advertisement calling for tenders for the Debentures, and in the form of Debenture ?

3. Supposing question (2) to be answered in the affirmative, what steps should now be taken to rectify the omission of such reference in the advertisement ?

We have taken the papers submitted to us into our consideration, and in obedience to your commands have the honour to

Report-

That the charges created by the Jamaica Laws 1, 2, 3, 36, and 39 of 1900, are by the terms of these Laws to have priority over any charges not existing at the dates of these Laws. At these dates Debentures had not been issued under Law 28 of 1899, and no charges under these Debentures existed; the charges under them will therefore be subject to the priority of the charges under the Laws 1, 2, 3, 36, and 39 of 1900.

2 and 3. We see no occasion for altering the advertisement or form of Debenture in this respect. The priority of the charges under the Laws of 1900 is part of the public law of the Colony, and if they were specially mentioned it might be said that the other charges which would rank pari passu with these Debentures ought to be mentioned too.

Aa, however, there may be some misunderstanding on the point, we think that attention should be drawn through the Press, and by circular, to any who may tender or have tendered for these Debentures, to the fact that loans have been raised under the Laws of 1900, and that such loans will have priority.

The Right Honourable Joseph Chamberlain, M.P.,

&C.,

&c.,

&c.

We have, &c.,

R. B. FINLAY. EDWARD CARSON.

40696.

SIR,

No. 62.

(SOUTH AFRICA.)

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

Royal Courts of Justice,

December 12, 1900.

WE were honoured with your commands signified to us in Mr. H. Bertram Cox's letter of the 22nd ultimo, stating that he was directed by you to transinit to us, for

our consideration, a despatch from Sir A. Milner, dated 20th August last, enclosing No. 626. certain correspondence with the British South Africa Company as to the right of the Legislative Council of Southern Rhodesia to impose a duty on spirits of South African manufacture.

That Mr. Bertram Cox enclosed, for our information, copies of (1) The Southern Rhodesia Order in Council, 20th October, 1898, and of the Order in Council of 2nd February, 1899; (2) The Customs Union Tariff Act, No. 8 of 1897, of Cape Colony, and (3) The Customs Union Convention, 1898, and the Cape Customs Act No. 6 of 1898, which came into operation on the 3rd of January, 1899.

That Mr. Bertram Cox was to request us to take the papers into our consideration and to report whether Clause 47 of the Order in Council of October, 1898, which provided that no Customs duty levied on articles produced or manufactured in any part of Her Majesty's Dominions and imported into Southern Rhodesia should exceed in amount the duty on such articles according to the tariff in force in the South African Customs Union at the commencement of the Order, or the tariff contained in the Convention of May, 1898, whichever were the higher, would prevent the imposition of a Customs duty on Cape brandy, seeing that that article was, at present, on the free list of the Convention.

We have taken the matter into our consideration, and, in obedience to your commands, have the honour to

Report-

THAT, in our opinion, Clause 47 of the Order in Council of October, 1898, does not prevent the imposition by the Legislative Council of Southern Rhodesia of a Customs duty on Cape brandy.

The tariff referred to in Article 47 of the Order in Council of October, 1898, means, we think, the tariff on importation from outside the limits of the Union. The exemption under Head 50 of the 1898 Convention for spirits made within the Union is conditional Any such on the imposition of a Customs duty under Section 16 of the Convention. duty is imposed by a particular State within the Union, and is not a duty under the tariff, and, in our opinion, Article 47 of the Order in Council has no relation either to the conditional exemption under Head 50 or to the amount of Customs duty under Section 16.

We, therefore, think that the proposed duty may be imposed.

We have, &c.,

The Right Honourable J. Chamberlain, M.P.,

&c.,

&c.,

&c.

7486-25-12/1900 Wt 824 D & S

6

R. B. FINLAY. EDWARD CARSON.

L