CO129-316 - Governor Sir Blake - 1903 [1-4] — Page 7

his Cox.

I have examined this order and it appear to be

draflid so ao

system.

begally to

cancy

int the propoact

I do not think the fewers of the Registrar under sec

122-12/ shifr objected to. They

ou the same a

#rose

confered on the band count by the 10 d. ander 18 of 1900 and offices to be aequally needful to the Registras

in administering this orde

There is a slight defect of from, fancy;

find any

as I cannot reference in the body of the order to from A *C, in the schurch, but this need hardly to noticed as under sec 21 (a) rify the Sort in Cormeil can make Rubes no

1

to theme Forums

? Proced

Comment an

proposed

2.J.R. 16/2

5

it

And add, with ref. to par that it is presumed that is not intended that Garden should I land for 75 yes, but

Lot

Act him Wheth he intouds

75 that 25

only for the state firends referred you shal

toon f. XXVI of the Land Commision Refort, 1886-87.

Arfuc

GWJ 20/2

(AF)

be the ter for Gander d if so hip reason for it. &

So purenet Sanction

proved

17BC

23/2

Grat

25 Felt

atone

Thu form

''

The new

Tarrilônico Titles ordinancer cą oż is rather mussal for

the full title of an Ordinance.

I suppose there is no

objection & it!

Mus Collsus

25/2.

Doverlooked this. If shite noticed & I

have added a par. to the draff

accordingly

JJR.25/2