CO129-220 - Governor Sir Bowen - 1885 [1-3] — Page 190

!

"... the first 5% (whereas the first is £1); \ " ant

the charge on application to register Jouppose 57. for each mark.

aily 100

Jo

I am not s that the 5p. "registering (unders

assume, "ques not

Zhir

the

include th

(143)

5.W

In Attorney General here says that we proposed to charge nothing for applicat the registration of all trader martes after the reque

as a matter of fact we the first; but charged a poll half a dollar however is practically nothing, being

the total charge for frist Kalhoun Mark, whereas in England

For 5 the proportion is apparently 3 (10 meter of 15

The provoking part of this despatch t of 4531 is that no attention is paid despl to some of the points raised in our

are answers; in this deaf to which they nothing is said in replistor explanation of the fact that charges have been madt in f several

at least 3 previous cases

2 5

|_

in which

marks (as ponited out in par. ? of despon 20910) according to our interpretation of the scale of fees; and in the deck. 4531, no

the respect, explanation is given of the application was incomplete, although

desp = showed that the applications to what made the thermal was com, what we thought.

owr

some in ance from

the correct & complete, (viz. mly for the several marks). tappe still think that

question

6

on one

"application

interpretation of the

fees was correct, although it would be better

You

2

188

for the scale of fees under Han

"Hongking Ordce to be revised (in the direction of clearness of meaning)

? Acknowledge 177, 3174,4530 ř 4531, and

filis

Que

and point out that the Attorney General has overlooked. the fact that (as pointed out in ther in desp. on 20910) corresp enclosed in desp. we did not charge nothing for ther Registration of the additional Marks begand the first, but 50 cents under the rule " for further affidavits, sach 50 cent); that this allusion to further affidavits appears to man include further Marks, as under

affidavit s. III of the Arde required for werzy Mark, & no further affidavit seems necessary except for a further mark; that this inter. pretation was only following precedents in at least 3 previous cases, as ponitud out in par. 2 of our deep (on 20910); that the question is not what the fees ought to be, but merely what is the unterpretation of the scale at present in

this force; and request therefore Lovernor to make a further reference to the Attorney Leneral, submitting this above observations; ask further in what respect the application referred to in 4531 was incomplete;