questionably meagre;
have
But he explains that there
must be other evidence of the prisoner's intent,
and
it is disturbing that in such cases
Magistrates are willing to believe that such was the case, but Magistrates should be bound to make their notes of the Evidence somewhat fuller. I agree with Mr Philipps in thinking that there was no moral doubt in this case; in the latter case.
The Governor's minute discharging the prisoner quotes Mr Philipps as admitting that the sentence was incorrect: I notice however that The Attorney General does not imply that there was any
doubt of the prisoner's guilt, only that the order requiring him to find security was made at the time of conviction/punishment
and
was incongruous as having been
made at the end of the imprisonment.
There is consequently little question as to the man being a danger to the peace & order of the Colony; & Low Commissioners
Perhaps refrain from expressing any opinion worth in the form
of Discretion
upon the Governor's judgment in refusing to deport/banish him from The Colony.
With regard to the Sentence of 24 strokes, the charge being stealing from the person, not simple larceny, and as under Ordinance 68 of 1862 then in force the magistrate had a discretion of awarding 36 strokes, it is perhaps permissible in Lord Carnarvon to determine that the Executive Council took some illegal action, in the absence of any explanation from the magistrate;
and I do not find that the Judge, Mr Justice Russell, called his attention to this, para 120.
Mr Hennessy regrets that he did not give Mr Philipps an opportunity of modifying/explaining or withdrawing his observations, and the Matter is not of sufficient importance to prolong the Correspondence by asking him to do so.
Mr Hennessy appears to be correct in his view of The Established practice of requiring Prisoners to find security when sentenced, and reporting the case to the Governor at the end of the imprisonment; and as the action is
in the usual course
A.J. Lee, Acting Colonial Secretary, and Mr May support a move to prevent the Error in future,
regarding the State; except to approve the action of the Govt. in calling attention to the subject. He does not
suggest that the sentences of imprisonment are vitiated by the order to find security,
or that subsequent orders of deportation
were illegal; as he has not consulted his advisers on either question, I therefore conclude that I need not report this matter further than for information only.
I also add a paragraph 5th. of despatch Explaining the necessity of deportation.
I partly agree
with the 5th paragraph in Mr Philipps' report in which he refers to the Pully case in India, the Attorney General comes near to being better to confine himself to legal advice as distinct from political comment; but Lord
Granard on Council of Queens & Magistrates
without unduly interfering with,
Page 216
(a marginal note: it is a shabby thick branch it runs behind This. fis be.)
& make it repay
-questionably meagres;
have
But he sx plains that there
must be other widine go of the prisoncis intent,
d
Jam
it is disauber that in such caters
Z
willing to belim That such was the case, but Magistrates should bond to make their noter of the Evidence someshah fullen. Zappe with Mr Philipps is of Mining that there was no moral dabte in this case; In the ththe case. w. The fovernor's menut discharging the prismen Guotes M. Philipps de admitte that the sentimer to how Hun incorrect: Inotice however that The Attorny furse don not imply that there was any
of the prisoners fuilt, only that the order requiring hime to fin d. security was made at the time of concretion/pustiane
of
inconut as having been
A
-
at the end of the imprisonment.
There is consquett little question as to the men being a dan Charalin, de donn
A
A
-ferous to the pream & oren of the Colony; & LowCarmanon iile
A
Perhaps refrain from of Iressing any opinion worth in the form
Discretion
८
upon the fovernor's judged in refusing to deport banish him from The Colony-
Tith
regand Stealing wer rotting
to the Sentence of 24 strokes, the charge
Ming from the person, not simple larceny, and as
unchen Ordinancn 68 1862 Then in fore the magistrate.
hand a
geuse Nowon of awarding 36 strokes, it is perhaps 5.-. Jissible In Lnd (aruaron to determine that the Exha Jou Jokes some illegal, in the absence of any 24 plancton
from & magistrats;
and II not find that the Jour
Chew Etc attention J. 120. Russell & this Jerint
apon him for any explanation
Zitt
1 Ama
216
(am
arom can scaras disch
any
action, as
M. Hennessy regents him to do, inasmuch as I for has
nut gin M. Philippo an opportunity of modifigig Explaining on with drawing his observations, and the Matter is not of dufficient importance to prolong the Covespondem Gregsing him to dononos. (It is a shably thick brands it home behind Thit. fis be. )_
& make it repay
MW. Henessy appears the conecte in his view of The Established praction of requiring Prismes & find Lemsily when sentiment, a Dreporting the case & this Governon at the end of the imprisonments; and as the
hv
action is
course
A.J. Lee Broncan & M. May supperti a Ireventing the Earon in future,
regind from the Sac state; except to approve the action of the God. in calling attention to the pubject. He does not
is suggests That the sentences of imprisonment are vitiatial bythiern
regard to the order to find security,
or that subregunt onders of deportation.
in
won illegal; a he has not coumthing
his advisers on wither Genstion, Theifer Iconclude that from hand reput I. This matter for information only.
Z
I also add a paragraphe 5th. despatch Enlayiz an
menssity of deportation-,
Caleyten
*
interfering with the
The jud in
waring the sentives
I parte apree
ryant 5the papery in Mr Philippo's report in which he refers to the Fully case in India, the Attorney Geverne comes how din- better to confine himself to 4 at advice as distinct from postitical comment; but Lont
Bendraser
on conful of Quases & Majeshutes
Without unduly interfering with,
#
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.