CO129-521-10 Colonial Treasurer Incorporation Ordinance 1930 17-10-1930 - 20-10-1930 — Page 4

t

Noted Precedents

照

Aut

4

I am sorry this has been delayed, by

pressure of other work.

I see no inherent legal objection to

creating a Colonial Officer a corporation sole, and

when he has to hold and deal with large Government

property interests, as in the case of the Colonial

Treasurer, this means of securing smooth working may

perhaps have some advantage. But it cannot be said

to be legally necessary, and this Ordinance may from

the general administrative point of view, form an

inconvenient precedent. If we had had it in draft

form, it might perhaps have been turned down on this

ground, but as it has been enacted, it would, I

presume, be undesirable to disallow it,

With regard to the minor point, a

reference to an Imperial enactment should be inserted

in the margin of a Colonial Ordinance only when the

latter is passed under or by virtue of the Imperial

enactment so referred to, e.g., an Ordinance passed

under Section 32 of the Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881,

or one passed with regard to the reciprocal enforce-

ment of judgments in pursuance of Part II of the

Administration of Justice Act, 1920.

Such references ought not to be inserted

merely to give the appearance of the authority of an

Imperial precedent for a Colonial enactment with which

it has no legal connection and to which it presents

only some sort of analogy.

I think I have seen occasional examples

of this incorrect use in other Colonial Ordinances,

J.J.R

7.1.31.