should hold the office of Captain
Police. His appt.
Superintendent of
took Acting Colonial Secretary does
not create a vacancy
Council.?
Mr. Cox.
in the
vacancy. 31/3/00
The question
is whether, while Mr May is "the person
for the time being lawfully discharging the functions of Colonial Secretary,"
he is or is not also "holding the
office of Capt. Sup. of Police! Under Col. Reg. 108 he
is probably not
de jure holding at the same
time two offices, though he is
drawing half his salary as Capt. Sup.,
I have no doubt. If he is Capt. Sup., his appointment to the Leg. Council warrant lapses; but before a new warrant will be required to enable the acting Capt. Sup. to take his seat, or to
give the seat to
someone else.
I should not
suppose a personal appointment is valid under Clause 1 of the Additional Instruction of 7 July, 1886.
I think this is
doubtful.
(x)--12435-2000-1-99 16195-2000-4-99
If this is so, an Ordinance will presumably be required, to render valid all acts of the Leg. Council done while he was a member, subsequent to the warrant. (The warrant
might be antedated). On the other hand, if Capt.
is still
holding
the
office
of Capt. Sup., it is clear that
there is no vacancy
unless he resigns
his seat as Capt. Sup. under Art. XIV of the Instructions of 19 July 1888, which is not revoked by the Additional Instructions of 7 July 1896, unless it is held
that under the same article his seat (which is not one
of actuals) as Ag. Col. Secy.
has become
vacant.
This is further complicated by the fact that Clause 13 of the Instructions of 1888
was
revoked by
the Instructions of 1896 without
any
other Article being actually
substituted for it; which leaves it doubtful whether Capt. is "a member of the Leg. Council not holding an office named in the preceding
Article" (Art. 14).
A.F. 31/3
should hold the oppics of Captain
Police. His appt.
Superintendent of
toke Acting Colonial Secretary docs
not create a vac
Council.?
Mr. Cox.
in the
vacancy Pod 31/3/00
The question
stem
to
MAR
کار
be whether, while M May is "the person
for the time being lawfully discharging the functions of Cobnial Secretary,"
he is a is not also "holding the
a
office of Caft. Suf? of Police! Under Col. Reg. 108 hein
"
he is probably not
the de Yued at the same
benig
his own
time to perfor
is
his own office, "though he half his salay as laft Suf", drawing half his salay
I
no doubt. If he is saft. Sufy, his app invord to the Leg. Concil. warant lapses; but I'mffore a nur warrant will be requid benable the acting (af) suf) to take his seat, or to
give the seat to
Dove ant
else's.
native
here proposed. I should not
ll. Brewin as
suffore a porsional app 7 is valid under inet of the Add 1 Instruction of 7 July, 1886.
think this is
3/4
ous.
(x)--12435-2000-1-99 16195-2000-4-99
a
validating
483
น
If this is so Ordt will presumably be regusid, to render valid all acts of the d. C. done while he was a member, furious
to the warrent. (On the warrant
be antedated) might I for the other hand Caft.
is still
holding
the
office
of Caft suf 7, it is clear that
there is no va
resigns
the Corneil,
unters be resijus his seat as (aft. Suf") under Art XTV of the Just my of 19 Jul 1888, which is not revoked the Add // Just s of 7 Jul 1896, a
amless it is held
one of
that under the same article his seat (which is not one
ffactuals) the offack mats) has become
his aff? as Ag. Col. Ser.
vacant I
This is further complicated by the fact that but 13 of the Just us, of 1888
wh
revoked by
the Just of 1896 without
other Article being actually
any
substituted fait; which teaves it doubtful whether Caftelley is "a member of the L. C. not holding an of the offices named in the preceding
Artich " (Art. 14).
aus 3/4
TACI
A.F. 31/3
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.