35 8
}
265
a pier he should confine himself to his own frontage. The Admiralty cannot be expected to alter their arrangements to suit him in view of the fact that his scheme was not even projected so far as is known when the Coaling Depot was designed.
It may, perhaps, be worth noting that as regards Dockyard
ports in the United Kingdom it has been clearly laid down by the Law
Officers quite recently that Admiralty have restrictive conservancy
rights over all foreshore and fundus irrespective of ownership (whether Crown or private), and that they have rights of dredging,
mooring, &c.
Our contention has been that this is a common law right, i.e. a prerogative right of Lord High Admiral for the Crown.
It appears questionable whether Colonial Government have all the Crown rights. Is not the King bound to defend his Realm!
(b). appears to be mainly a question of title.
It is assumed that where land is held on any title other than
a grant or transfer from a Colonial Government, no claim of this
character can be made.
Where the title is derived from the Colonial Government the validity of the claim would depend upon the conditions of transfer.
The most usual condition is that the land is to be used for purposes of defence by the Department concerned, and if no longer required for defence purposes, is to revert to the Colony:
This case was raised at Malta when the Civil Government contended that certain lands, then in War Office control, were originally appropriated for purposes of defence, and in 1896 an Order in Council was passed restricting the erection of buildings within a certain area which would be prejudicial to any works of
defence
Page 270Page 271
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.