FORFEIT TO THE CROWN

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 21, 25 July 1934, Page 7

FORFEIT TO THE CROWN

SEIZED SILVER

ATTEMPT TO EXPORT

COURT'S INTERPRETATION

(By Telegraph.—Press Association.) v . AIJCKLAND, July 24. An affirmative answer has been' given by Mr. Justice'Eferdman to the : question whether the regulatidns prohibiting an attempt to export coined silver from New Zealand rare valid. The question was raised in an action between the '■ Solicitor-General and William Toomey,' masseur, of Auckland, to determine whetner the Solici-tor-General had the right to demand Toomey to forfeit the sum t>f £807 ia silver which was stolen from a motorcar in Wanganuilast year and which it was alleged was being taken t» "Wellington for export! Mr. Justice Herdman said that seetioaa2 ; of the Finance Act, 1931 (No. 2), authorised the making of certain regulations, fixed the penalty for, a breach, of the regulations, and provided for the forfeiture of the silver with which the particular , breach of the regulations was concerned. In its original form sub-section 3 of section 12 gave the Crown limited authority only, for forfeiture could take place only upon proof of importation into New Zealand or exportation from New Zealand. This difficulty was realised, and to meet' it: sub-section 2 of section 12 was amended to provide for forfeiture of silver which was the subject of any breach of .--..a regulation made' Sunder the authority of the Statute. -,-,"■.-.■- ,;. '~■•■■" '. ; The; allegation in this case was that there. ■fras an attempt ; to export.. silver within the meaning of clause 4 of •the. regulations, and the question for determination was -whether the Statute empowered the Governor-General in. Council to' create this . as an offence. "A regulation prohibiting the com* plete act of exportation only would ba of little use," said Mr. Justice Herdman. "I cannot, see why, under thev general power to make regulations to prohibit the export ■ of. silver, the Governbr-General should not have authority, ""to prohibit every step takenby a person who intends to export for the - purpose. of achieving his ultimate object. This case, I think, comes -within 'the following principle stated by Maxwell on the interpretation' of Statutes: 'Where an Act con-; fers jurisdiction it iinpliedly also grants the power 'of doing all . such, acts or employing such means as are essentially necessary to its execution.* My answer to the question asked ml the notice of motion is in the affirma* tive, and the sum'of £7 7s is allowed to the informant for costs."