A.—2
1906. NEW ZEALAND.
DESPATCHES FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES TO THE GOVERNOR OF NEW ZEALAND.
Presented to both Houses of the General Assembly by Command of His Excellency
INDEX.
I—A. 2,
No of Series. Date. Subject. Page. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 (21 *22 23 24 25 26 18 Mar., 1905.. 22 Mar., „ .. 3 April, ,, .13 April, „ .. 25 April, „ 5 May, „ .. 24 May, „ .. 2 June, ,, 17 June, ,, .. 15 July, „ .. 17 July, „ .. 1 Aug., „ .. 3 Aug., „ .. 16 Aug., „ .. 19 Aug., ■„--.. 24 Aug., „ .. 31 Aug., „ . . 21 Sept., „ .. 13 Oct., „ .. 11 Dec, „ .. 16 Dec, „ .. 4 Jan., 1906. . 11 Jan., ,, .. 22 Feb., „ .. 23 Feb., „ .. 23 Feb., „ .. Registration of British emigrants at British consulates Attestation of documents required by foreign Governments Privy Council issue of Appearance Orders to respondents New Zealand Ensign and merchant flag. Badge used by Governor Marriages by foreign consular officers Penguin rookeries, Auckland and Macquarie Islands Judgment of Privy Council: Chalmers licensing district Cuba : Treaty for extradition of criminals Swiss Confederation : Extradition of criminals, supplementary article Death of Mr. Secretary Hay, United States of America Penny postage : Australia will receive letters without surcharge Anglo-Belgian treaty for extradition of criminals Medical qualifications for registration Visit of Lieut.-Colonel Kirkpatrick to study strategic conditions, &c. Appointment of Vice-Admiral Sir W. H. Fawkes as Commander-in-Chief .. Death of Mr. Secretary Hay, United States of America.. Registration of trade-marks in Argentine Republic Wireless-telegraphy stations .. .. ... Penguin rookeries : Auckland and other Islands Lord Elgin appointed Secretary of State for the Colonies Union of Sweden and Norway dissolved " New Zealand International Exhibition Act, 1905," left to operation New Zealand Acts, 1905, left to operation "Australian and Naval Defence Act, 1905," left to operation " Shipping and Seamen Act Amendment Act, 1905," assented to " Marriages Validation Act, 1905," assented to 2 4 4 5 5 6 6 9 12 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 18 19 19 19 19 20
A.—2
2
No. 1. (Circular.) Sir, — Downing Street, 18th March, 1905. I have the honour to inform you that, in view of the difficulty experienced in establishing the nationality of the claimants when the British claims recently came up for examination before the Venezuelan Claims Commission, it has been decided by His Majesty's Government to encourage as much as possible the practice of registration at His Majesty's consulates abroad, and more especially in the case of British subjects resorting to Central and South America; and the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has suggested the desirability of posting public notices at the various ports of emigration in the West Indies or other places in which it may seem advisable, impressing upon all emigrants of British nationality the advisability of having themselves registered at a British consulate on the earliest opportunity after arrival at their destination, and warning them against the difficulties which their failure to do so may entail. 2. I enclose for the information of your Ministers a copy of the new regulations which have been issued to His Majesty's consular officers abroad on the subject, and have to request you to invite your Government to consider the necessity for the issue of a notification for the guidance of any emigrants to foreign countries from the colony under your Government, calling their attention to the new consular regulations affecting this matter. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
Enclosure. Registration op British Subjects. Every British subject is entitled, should he desire to do so, to register himself at a British consulate, and to obtain a certificate that he is so registered. Where it is desirable, on account of the number of persons presenting themselves for registration or for other reasons, to keep a special register of British subjects, it should be kept in accordance with the provisions of this circular. The register should contain the particulars provided for in the form of Annex 1. An applicant for registration should be required to fill up a form (Annex 2), and should not be registered until his claim has been established to the satisfaction of the consular officer. British-protected persons should be registered in the register of British subjects, but the fact that they are British-protected persons should be noted in the register. An applicant of European descent, who is not personally known to the consular officer, claiming British nationality on the ground of birth within the British dominions should produce a letter from some known and responsible person certifying to his identity and British nationalty, or satisfactory evidence of some other description. Where British nationality is claimed under the statute 4 Geo. 11, cap. 21— i.e., on the ground that the claimant's father was a natural-born British subject though the claimant was born abroad, the following evidence should be required: (a) A certificate of the birth of the applicant; (b) the marriage certificate of the parents; (c) the birth certificate of the father. Where the nationality is claimed by descent from the paternal grandfather under the statute 13 Geo. 111, cap. 21, evidence in addition to that in paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) above should be required as to — (d) The marriage of the paternal grandparents; (c) the birth of the paternal grandfather within the British dominions. In the case of persons of Asiatic or West Indian descent, or of natives of Africa, the following evidence may in general be considered sufficient: — (a.) A passport or certificate of British nationality issued to him as a British subject, or certificate of registration as a British subject, in British India or British possessions, or by a British consular officer; (6.) A birth certificate showing that he was born within His Majesty's dominions, or a certificate of naturalisation in the United Kingdom ; and (c.) In either of the above cases such further evidence of identity as the consular officer may think satisfactory. Where the documents mentioned in (a) bear a date anterior to this circular, they should not be accepted as conclusive, if the consular officer sees any reason to doubt the validity of the claim to British nationality; and, where the passport has been issued more than six months, evidence may be required from the applicant that he has not changed his nationality since the issue of the passport.
A.—2
3
Natives of British Protectorates, or of the territories of any Prince or State in India under the suzerainty of or in alliance with His Majesty, must produce a passport issued by His Majesty's representative in their own country, together with evidence of identity if the consular officer thinks necessary. A British subject possessed of double nationality is entitled to registration (even though he may not be entitled to protection) in his country of origin. A certificate of registration in the form of Annex 3 should be given on application to any person who is registered as a British subject or British-protected person on payment of fee No. 67. Where a person was registered before the issue of this circular, and the consular officer is unaware whether the claim to British nationality was properly investigated before the entry was made, the consular officer should obtain further evidence before the certificate is granted. In cases where the consular officer entertains doubt whether the applicant is entitled to registration, he should draw up a full statement of the facts, and refer the matter to the Secretary of State for instructions.
Annex 1. Register of British Subjects.
Annex 2. Declaration to be made by Applicant for Registration. [Insert name of place and date] 190 . I, the undersigned [Christian names and surname of the applicant in full, and present address'], residing within the Consular District of , hereby declare that lam [For a married woman or widow (to be struck out in other cases): Particulars of husband's birth to follow. In the, case of a married woman or widow, the particulars of birth required, are those of her wife husband, or late husband — not of the applicant herself] : the —r-i of , and that my husband is born at ~-, , , a British subject , having been — ~ -r-r—\iitate the country where late husband was J b naturalised in the applicant was naturalised], on the day of [For persons born abroad, who derive British nationality from a father or paternal grandfather born within His Majesty's father ~ , , dominions (to be struck out in other cases)]: my (his) paterna | grandfather havm B been boru within His Majesty's dominions at , on the day of , and not having lost the status of British subject thus acquired, and I hereby apply to be registered as a British subject. Signed [Where the applicant is unable to write, a mark should be made by him or her in the presence of the consular officer].
Annex 3.
Date of o. I Registration. Plaoe and Name. Date of Birth. Name of Father. r Place and Employment j Other Ground of On what Date of and Nationality Claim to British Evidence Birth. Residence. (if any). Nationality, registered. i I _... . :
Page His Majesty's Consulate. No. . His Britannic Majesty's Consulate. Certificate of Registration. Foil of Certificate of Registration. I hereby certify that is duly registered at this consulate in the register of British subjects. Dated this day of Consul. No. . of 1. Name 2. Father's name [ and residence) 3. Residence of) Applicant i 4. Occupation 5. Age Remarks of registering officer — Number. Page in foil. Signature of party registered. Note.—This certificate of registration must be carefully kept by the party in whose favour it is issued.
4
A.—2
No. 2. (Circular.) Sir, — Downing Street, 22nd March, 1905. I have the honour to inform you that considerable difficulty has been experienced in this Department in connection with the attestation of signatures to documents executed in the colonies and required for use by foreign Governments. 2. I have to call your attention to Chapter VII, paragraph VII, of the: Colonial Regulations (Nos. 229, 230, and 231), and to state that, save under exceptional circumstances, I do not feel justified in authorising the certification for legislation of any signatures except those of the Governor or Officer Administering the Government; and I shall be glad if you will invite your Ministers to adopt some means of notifying persons concerned of what is required in order to facilitate the legalisation of documents in this country. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
Enclosure. Extract from Rules and Regulations of His Majesty's Colonial Service referred to in above Despatch, 1904. Chapter VII, Paragraph VII. Attestation to Documents. 229. The attestation of signatures to documents can only take place upon a full knowledge 01 intimate belief in the genuineness of those signatures, and, as a general rule, the Secretary of State can only undertake to attest those of Governors or Officers administering Government. 230. Persons, therefore, who may have occasion to instruct their friends or agents in any colony to send to them certificates, or powers of attorney, or judicial acts for legal use in this country, should take care to have these documents authenticated in the colony by the Officer administering the Government. 231. The same rule must particularly be observed by the Governor in sending Home documents which, after being verified in England, are intended to be used in foreign countries. The last signature attached by way of attestation to any such document must invariably be one which is known, and can therefore be certified to, in this Department. If possible it should always be that of the Officer administering the Government.
No. 3. (Circular.) Sir, — Downing Street, 3rd April, 1905. I have the honour to transmit, for the information of your Government and for publication in the colony, a copy of an Order of the King in Council of the 20th March, 1905, amending the practice with regard to the issue of Appearance Orders to respondents who have not appeared to an appeal to His Majesty in Council. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
Enclosure. At the Court at Buckingham Palace, the 20th day of March, 1905. Present: The King's Most Excellent Majesty, Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord President, Lord Suffield, Sir William Walrond. Whereas there was this day read at the Board a representation from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, dated the 16th day of March, 1905, and in the words following, viz.: — " The Lords of the Judicial Committee having taken into consideration the practice under which an appeal to Your Majesty in Council cannot in the absence of a special Order in that behalf made by their Lordships be set down for hearing ex parte as against a respondent to the appeal who has failed to enter an appearance thereto in the Registry of the Privy Council unless the appellant shall have previously obtained from their Lordships two successive Orders, commonly known as ' Appearance Orders,' requiring the said respondent to enter an appearance to the appeal within the periods by the said Orders respectively limited, and shall have duly published the said Orders by affixing the same on the Royal Exchange and elsewhere in the usual manner, and unless
A.—2
5
the said periods so limited by the said Orders as aforesaid shall have expired: And being of opinion that the said practice is inconvenient and ought in certain cases and subject to certain conditions to be dispensed with: Their Lordships do this day agree humbly to recommend to Your Majesty to order as follows, that is to say : — " 1. That where a respondent to an appeal to Your Majesty in Council whose name has been entered on the record of the appeal by the Court admitting the appeal fails to enter an appearance to the appeal in the Registry of the Privy Council, and it appears from the transcript record in the appeal or from a certificate of the Officer of the Court transmitting the said transcript record to the Registrar of the Privy Council that the said respondent has received notice of the Order admitting the appeal to Your Majesty in Council or of the Order of Your Majesty in Council giving the appellant special leave to appeal to Your Majesty in Council (as the case may be), and has also received notice of the despatch of the said transcript record to the Registrar of the Privy Council, the appellant shall not, subject to any direction by their Lordships to the contrary, be required to take out Appearance Orders calling upon the said respondent to enter an appearance in the appeal, and the appeal may, subject as aforesaid, be set down for hearing ex parte as against the said respondent at any time after the expiration of three calendar months from the date of the lodging of the appellant's petition of appeal in like manner as if the said Appearance Orders had been taken out by the appellant and the times thereby respectively limited for the said respondent to enter an appearance had expired. " 2. That where a respondent to an appeal to Your Majesty in Council whose name has been brought on the record of the appeal by an Order of Your Majesty in Council fails to enter an appearance to the appeal in the Registry of the Privy Council, and it appears from the transcript record, or from a supplementary record in the appeal, or from a certificate of the Officer of the Court transmitting the said transcript record or supplementary record to the Registrar of the Privy Council that the said respondent has received due notice of any intended application to Your Majesty in Council to bring him on the record as a respondent to the appeal, the appellant shall not, subject to any direction by their Lordships to the contrary, be required to take out Appearance Orders calling upon the said respondent to enter an appearance in the appeal, and the appeal may, subject as aforesaid, be set down for hearing ex parte as against the said respondent at any time after the expiration of three calendar months from the date on which the said respondent shall have been served with a copy of Your Majesty's Order in Council bringing him on the record of the appeal in like manner as if the said Appearance Orders had been taken out by the appellant and the times thereby respectively limited for the said respondent to enter an appearance had expired. "3. That nothing herein contained shall be deemed to affect the power of their Lordships to order the appellant in an appeal referred by Your Majesty to their Lordships to take out Appearance Orders, or to be excused from taking out Appearance Orders, in any case in which their Lordships shall think fit so to order, and generally to give such directions as to the time at which and the conditions on which an appeal so referred as aforesaid shall be set down as in the opinion of their Lordships the circumstances of the case may require. " i. That this Order shall apply to all appeals in which the petition of appeal shall be lodged after the date hereof." His Majesty, having taken the said representation into consideration, was pleased, by and with the advice of His Privy Council, to approve thereof, and of what is therein recommended. Whereof all persons whom it may concern are to take notice, and govern themselves accordingly. A. W. Fitzrot.
No. 4. (Miscellaneous.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 13th April, 1905. With reference to Lord Ranfurly's despatch (No. 59) of the 4th July, 1902, enclosing drawings of the New Zealand Ensign and merchant flag, I should be glad if Your Lordship would be good enough to transmit tome a copy of the badge of the colony as it appears on the flag to be used by the Governor in accordance with Chapter XX, Article 432.3 of the Colonial Regulations, when embarked in boats or other vessels. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. Governor the Right Hon. Lord Plunket, X.C.V.0., &c.
No. 5. (Circular.) Sir, — Downing Street, 25th April, 1905. I have the honour to transmit to you a copy of a. letter, with enclosures, received from the Foreign Office, relative to an inquiry made by the SwedishNorwegian Minister at this Court as to whether marriages solemnised by Swedish diplomatic and consular officers, in virtue of the Swedish law of Bth
A.—2
6
July, 1904, between Swedish subjects, or between a Swedish subject and a person of some other nationality not being a British subject, would be recognised in the British Empire. I shall be glad to be informed at an early date whether marriages solemnised by foreign consular officers are valid in contemplation of the laws of the colony under your Government. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
Enclosures. Sir,— Foreign Office, 11th April, 1905. I am directed by the Marquess of Lansdowne to transmit to you, for the information of Mr. Secretary Lyttelton, the accompanying copies of correspondence as marked in the margin respecting an inquiry made by Baron Bildt, the Swedish-Norwegian Minister at this Court, as to whether the new Swedish law of Bth July, 1904, regulating the solemnisation of marriages between Swedish subjects by Swedish diplomatic and consular officers abroad can be put in force in this country without coming into conflict with the municipal law of England. The matter was referred to the Law Officers of the Crown, who expressed the opinion that such marriages are governed by the provisions of the Act 4 Geo. IV, cap. 76. Section 21 of that Act attaches a heavy penalty to the solemnisation of marriages in this country by any person in any other place than a church, or such public chapel wherein banns may be lawfully published, and* section 22 provides that marriages so solemnised shall be deemed null and void for all purposes whatsoever. As regards marriages solemnised at a foreign embassy or legation between subjects of the country to which the embassy or legation belongs, the Law Officers considered that these are not affected by the statute, but that all other marriages at embassies and legations, and all marriages at foreign consulates are prohibited in this country, unless the requirements of English municipal law have been complied with. Baron Bildt was informed accordingly, but as the above quoted Act only applies to England, the Swedish Government are anxious to know how the matter stands in other parts of the British Empire. The question therefore only concerns consular marriages in Ireland, Scotland, India, and the colonies. Lord Lansdowne would therefore be glad to know whether marriages solemnised by foreign consular officers are valid in contemplation of the laws of the various British colonies. I am, &c, The Under-Secretary of State, Colonial Office. E. Gorst.
Monsieur lb Marquis,— Londres, le 12 Novembre, 1904. Le Gouvernement dv Roi ayant l'intention, en vertu de la loi suedoise dv 8 Juillet, 1904, d'accorder a certains fonctionnaires diplomatiques et consulaires a l'etranger I'autorisation de proceder conformement a la dite loi a la celebration de mariages entre sujets suedois ou bien entre un sujet" suedois et un sujet dun autre Etat, j'ai I'honneur, d'ordre de mon Gouvernement, de m'adresser a la bienveillance habituelle de Votre Seigneurie en La priant de vouloir bien me faire savoir si de la part dv Gouvernement de Sa Majeste Britannique rien ne s'oppose.a cc que nos fonctionnaires diplomatiques et consulaires exercent dans I'Empire Britannique les fonctions susmentionnees a condition toutefois qu'aucune dcs parties contractantes ne soit ressortissante de l'Empire Britannique. Je saisis en meme temps, &c, Sa Seigneurie Monsieur le Marquis de Lansdowne, K.G. &c. Bildt.
My Lord, — London, 27th March, 1905. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of Your Lordship's letter of the 20th February ultimo in answer to the letter of this Legation of the 12th November, 1904, concerning the eventual recognition in the British Empire of marriages solemnised by Swedish diplomatic or consular officers. It being desired by my Government, in view of the Swedish law of the Bth July, 1904, to jinpower our diplomatic and consular officers to perform marriages at the legations and certain consulates in all countries where such marriages will be recognised as valid by local legislation, I venture to apply for some further information as to the validity within the British Empire of such marriages, and more especially to call Your Lordship's attention to the following points: — The Act of Geo. IV, cap. 76, concerning marriages, enclosed in Your Lordship's letter of the 20th February above mentioned, expressly states in section 33 that the Act shall "extend only to that part of the United Kingdom called England," whereas my Government are interested in the recognition of the marriages solemnised by their diplomatic or consular officers throughout the British Empire; moreover, judging from the fact that a marriage can be lawfully concluded in this country at a registry office, it would appear that even in England the sections 21 and 22 of the Act above referred to are not in unmitigated force. Your Lordship is also pleased to add at the end of the letter of the 20th February above mentioned that "all other marriages at embassies or legations," save those of subjects of the country to which the embassy or legation belongs, "and all marriages at foreign consulates are
A.—2
7
prohibited in this country unless the requirements of English municipal law have been complied with." May I understand from this that if certain requirements are carried out, marriages at Swedish consulates may be lawfully performed in this country by the Swedish Consuls, and, if so, might I be favoured with a statement of these requirements? My Government further desiring to empower their Ministers and certain Consuls to solemnise the marriage of a Swedish subject, not only to another Swedish subject, but also to any other person who may not be a subject of the land in which the marriage takes place, I would also be grateful to Your Lordship for information whether such marriages, where one party is a Swedish subject and the other of some other nationality, will be recognised in the British Empire, if performed at a Swedish legation or consulate by the competent Swedish officer, on the condition that the non-Swedish party is not a British subject. I have, &c, The Marquess of Lansdowne, E.G., &c. Ch. Em. Ramel.
No. 6. (No. 35.) My Lord,— Downing Street, sth May, 1905. I have the honour to transmit to you, to be laid before your Ministers, the accompanying extract from the Daily Mail of the 24th April, concerning the disappearance of penguin rookeries in the Auckland Islands. 2. Mrs. Speed, of " The Rectory," Yarmouth, Isle of Wight, has asked me to bring the extract to the attention of your Ministers, with a view to the preservation of the rookeries. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. Governor the Right Hon. Lord Plunket, X.C.V.0., &c.
Enclosure. Doom of the Penguin. Dr. E, A. Wilson, the assistant surgeon of the "Discovery" Antarctic Expedition, has recently littered some grave warnings as to the fate of the penguin rookeries of Macquarie Island and the Auckland Islands. He is anxious that the Society for the Protection of Birds should endeavour to rescue these helpless creatures from the greed of company promoters. For some years past speculators have pushed a growing trade in penguin oil, no less than 100 tons of this, procured by boiling down countless thousands of birds, having recently been put upon the market. Quite lately, Dr. Wilson remarks, information has come to hand of a scheme to send out cauldrons to the Auckland Islands to facilitate the traffic, which means that the last of the birds will soon have disappeared.
No. 7. (No. 38.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 24th May, 1905. I have the honour to transmit to you, for communication to your Ministers, the papers noted in the subjoined schedule. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
Judgment of the Lords of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on the Appeal of Bastings and others v. Callaghan, from the Court of Appeal of New Zealand. Delivered the 12th May, 1905. Present at the hearing: Lord Macnaghten, Lord Davey, Lord Robertson, Sir Ford North, Delivered by Lord Macnaghten. The question raised on this appeal is whether Mr. Graham, a Stipendiary Magistrate within the Colony of New Zealand, duly appointed under " The Magistrates' Courts Act, 1893," had jurisdiction to hear a petition in the matter of " The Alcoholic Liquors Sale Control Act Amendment Act, 1895," which was filed in the office of the Magistrate's Court, Port Chalmers. The question turns upon the construction of the Act of 1895, and involves consideration of provisions in three other Acts—" The Regulation of Local Elections Act, 1876," the Act of 1893, and "The Resident Magistrate's Act, 1867," which the Act of 1893 repealed.
Enclosure. Date. I Subject. 12th May, 1905 ' .. .. Judgment of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on the appeal of Bastings and others t>. r Callaghan (three enclosures).
A.—2
8
There was no appearance at their Lordships' bar on behalf of the respondent. But, inasmuch as the question depends simply on the meaning and effect of certain statutory provisions, and as the arguments on the one side and on the other are presented very fully and ably by the learned Judges in the Court of Appeal, who differed in opinion, their Lordships are at less disadvantage than usual in dealing with an appeal ex parte. By section 3 of the Act of 1895 it is provided that no license shall be granted or renewed until the electors of the district shall have determined whether the number of licenses in the district shall be continued or be reduced, or whether no licenses shall be granted in the district. Then follow provisions for the taking of a licensing poll. By section 7, subsection (1), paragraph (o), it is provided that if the result of any poll is disputed, any fifty electors may require an inquiry to be held in manner provided by section 48 and the subsequent sections of the Act of 1876, and that the matter in dispute shall be determined in the same manner, mutatis mutandis, as if the licensing poll were an electoral poll. By section 48 of the Act of 1876 it is provided that if within fourteen days after any election any six electors make and sign a declaration in the form set out in the Sixth Schedule to the Act, and " file the same in any Resident Magistrate's Court in the district in which such election took place, or if there is no such Court in the district, then in the Resident Magistrate's Court nearest thereto, the Resident Magistrate of such Court shall hold an inquiry as to the matter alleged in such petition." On the 25th of November, 1902, a licensing poll was taken in the Electoral District of Chalmers.. The result of the poll was declared to be that no licenses should be granted in the said district. On the 9th December, 1902, the appellants and other electors of the Electoral District of Chalmers, being above fifty in number, filed a petition in the office of the Magistrate's Court of Port Chalmers, praying that the declaration of the result of the poll might be declared void. The petition was brought before Mr. Graham, who occasionally sits at Port Chalmers, though Mr. Carew usually sits there, while Mr. Graham is in the habit of presiding at Dunedin, which is outside the Electoral District of Chalmers. Mr. Graham was proceeding to deal with the application when the respondent, who is a storekeeper near Dunedin, and an elector of the Electoral District of Chalmers, appeared by counsel and objected to the petition being heard by Mr. Graham, on the ground that he had no jurisdiction in the matter, and that the jurisdiction was vested in Mr. Carew. On motion before the Supreme Court, Williams, J., ordered that a writ of prohibition should issue out of the Supreme Court prohibiting Mr. Graham from proceeding to hear the petition. On appeal the judgment of Williams, J., was affirmed by the Court of Appeal, Denniston, J., and Edwards, J., dissenting. At the date when the Act of 1876 was passed there were in the Colony of New Zealand Resident Magistrates appointed and holding office under the Act of 1867. By that Act the Government was authorised to constitute throughout the colony districts to be called "Resident Magistrates' districts," and to appoint for each district a Resident Magistrate to exercise his office therein, who should hold Courts in and for such districts at such time and places as should be deemed most convenient by the Resident Magistrate, or as should from time to time be appointed by the Governor. The 19th section of the Act provided that the Resident Magistrate's Court of any district should have jurisdiction only where the cause of action had arisen, either wholly or in some material point within the district in which the action was brought, or the party sought to be charged was residing or carrying on business, or was served with the process of the Court, within such district. The jurisdiction, therefore, of Resident Magistrates and Resident Magistrates' Courts under this Act was purely local. The Act of 1867 was repealed by the Act of 1893, which contains the following provisions in section 6: "Where in an unrepealed Act reference is made to any Act repealed by this Act, or to any provisions thereof, or to any Court, office, or officer established, constituted, or appointed under any Act hereby repealed, such reference shall be construed and shall operate as if made to this Act, or to the provisions of this Act corresponding to the provisions referred to, or to the Court, office, or officer constituted or appointed under this Act." By the Act of 1893 the system in force under the Act of 1867 was entirely changed. Magistrates were no longer to be appointed or to hold office for particular districts. There were no longer to be separate Courts with merely local jurisdiction. The very name of the office was altered. Instead of Resident Magistrates there were to be Stipendiary Magistrates appointed to hold office "within the colony." The Magistrates' Court was no longer a collection of separate Courts. It was to be one Court throughout the whole colony. There is no provision in the Act making one Stipendiary Magistrate subordinate to another. Apart from any question of " ordinary" or " extended jurisdiction," as provided for by the Act, all Stipendiary Magistrates are of equal rank and of equal authority. In this respect the Magistrates' Court has been assimilated to the Supreme Court. "Before the Supreme Court Act," as Denniston, J., observes, "the Judges were appointed to specific districts in which alone they (except under special circumstances) had jurisdiction. In some cases two Judges were appointed to the same district. In such case each Judge would be the Judge of such district. Under 'The Supreme Court Act, 1882,' these territorial appointments were abolished. Every Judge is appointed and acts as Judge in Court in the colony. In practice Judges are in fact resident in and act in separate judicial districts. But this does not affect their jurisdiction or right to sit and act in any part of the colony. The Supreme Court Judge who, in practice, takes, say, the Wanganui sittings is more the Judge of that Court than is his colleague." The opinion of Edwards, J., is to the same effect: "Wherever there are two Judges or two Magistrates," says His Honour, "exercising the <;ame jurisdiction in the same Court and at the same places' the work of the Court must of necessity be distributed by arrangement between them, but neither 'derives his jurisdiction from such arrangement nor is his jurisdiction limited by such
9
A.—2
arrangement. That jurisdiction depends entirely upon his appointment, and it is general. The sphere within which it is to be exercised is, in the case of Magistrates, undoubtedly controlled in practice by departmental arrangements, but the jurisdiction is general. Any Stipendiary Magistrate who, as part of his official duty in accordance with departmental arrangements, from time to time as occasion requires exercises jurisdiction at any place is, in my opinion, one of the Magistrates of the Magistrate's Court at that place." In these observations their Lordships concur. This view is sufficient for the determination of the present case, because Mr. Graham, as part of his official duty in accordance with departmental arrangement, does from time to time exercise jurisdiction at Port Chalmers, though he sits there less frequently than Mr. Carew. By arrangement with Mr. Carew, Mr. Graham has taken up this matter, and is apparently peculiarly qualified to deal with it, being Chairman ex officio of the Licensing Committee of Chalmers under section 19 of the Act of 1895. Their Lordships, indeed, are prepared to go further. They think that, as every Magistrate is now a Magistrate throughout the colony and all separate local jurisdiction has been abolished in the Magistrate's Court, a Stipendiary Magistrate who in his official capacitj' receives a petition presented under the Act of 1895, and assumes the duty of dealing with it, has jurisdiction to act. Their Lordships are therefore of opinion that the appeal should be allowed. And they will humbly advise His Majesty to allow the appeal and dismiss the action, with costs, in the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. The respondent must pay the costs of this appeal.
No. 8. (Circular.) Sir,- Downing Street, 2nd June, 1905. I have the honour to transmit to you, for publication in the colony under your Government, a copy of an Order of His Majesty the King in Council, dated the 10th May, 1905, for giving effect to the treaty between His Majesty and the President of the Republic of Cuba for the mutual extradition of fugitive criminals, signed at Havana on the 3rd October, 1904, ratifications of which were exchanged at Havana on the 10th January, 1905. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
Enclosure. Order in Council. Applying the Extradition Treaty with Cuba of the 3rd October, 1904. At the Court at Buckingham Palace, the 10th day of May, 1905. —Present: The King's Most Excellent Majesty, Lord President, Lord Steward, Earl of Kintore, Sir H. Aubrey-Fletcher, Sir Savile Crossley. Whereas by the Extradition Acts, 1870 to 1895, it was amongst other things enacted that, where an arrangement has been made with any foreign State with respect to the surrender to such State of any fugitive criminals, His Majesty may, by Order in Council, direct that the said Acts shall apply"in the case of such foreign State; and that His Majesty may, by the same or any subsequent Order, limit the operation of the Order, and restrict the same to fugitive criminals who are in or suspected of being in the part of His Majesty's dominions specified in the Order, and render the operation thereof subject to such conditions, exceptions, and qualifications as may be deemed expedient: And whereas a treaty was concluded on the third day of October, one thousand nine hundred and four, between His Majesty and the President of the Republic of Cuba for the mutual extradition of fugitive criminals, which treaty is in the terms following: — His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India, and His Excellency the President of the Republic of Cuba, having determined, by common consent, to conclude a treaty for the extradition of criminals, have accordingly named as their plenipotentiaries: — His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Lionel E. G. Carden, Esq., Minister Resident of Great Britain in Cuba, and His Excellency the President of the Republic of Cuba, Carlos E. Ortiz y Coffigny, Secretary of State and Justice; who, after having exhibited to each other their respective full powers and found them in good order and due form, have agreed upon the following articles: — Article I. The high contracting parties engage to deliver up to each other ( under certain circumstances and conditions stated in the present treaty, those persons who, being accused or convicted of any of the crimes or offences enumerated in Article 11, committed in the territory of the one party, shall be found within the territory of the other party.
2—A. 2.
A.—2
10
Article 11. Extradition shall be reciprocally granted for the following crimes or offences : — 1. Murder, or attempt or conspiracy to murder. 2. Manslaughter. 3. Administering drugs or using instruments with intent to procure the miscarriage of women. 4. Rape. 5. Carnal knowledge or any attempt to have carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of puberty according to the laws of the respective countries. 6. Indecent assault. 7. Kidnapping and false imprisonment, child-stealing. 8. Abduction. 9. Bigamy. 10. Maliciously wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm. 11. Assault occasioning actual bodily harm. 12. Threats, by letter or otherwise, with intent to extort money or other things of value. 13. Perjury or subornation of perjury. 14. Arson. 15. Burglary or housebreaking, robbery with violence, larceny, or embezzlement. 10. Fraud by a bailee, banker, agent, factor, trustee, director, member, or public officer of any company. 17. Obtaining money, valuable security, or goods by false pretences; receiving any money, valuable security, or other property, knowing the same to have been stolen or unlawfully obtained. 18. («.) Counterfeiting or altering money or bringing into circulation counterfeited or altered money, {b.) Knowingly making without lawful authority any instrument, tool, or engine adapted and intended for the counterfeiting of the coin of the realm, (c.) Forgery or uttering what is forged. 19. Crimes against bankruptcy law. 20. Any malicious act done with intent to endanger the safety of any persons travelling or being upon a railway. 21. Malicious injury to property, if such offence be indictable. 22. Piracy and other crimes or offences committed at sea against persons or things which, according to the laws of the high contracting parties, are extradition offences, and are punishable by more than one year's imprisonment. 23. Dealing in slaves in such manner as to constitute a criminal offence against the laws of both States. Extradition shall also be granted for participation in any of the aforesaid crimes, provided such participation be punishable by the laws of both contracting parties. Extradition may also be granted at the discretion of the State applied to in respect of any other crime for which, according to the law of both the contracting parties for the time being in force, the grant can be made. Article 111. Neither party is obliged to surrender its own subjects or citizens to the other party. Article IF. Extradition shall not take place if the person claimed on the part of His Majesty's Government, or of the Government of Cuba, has already been tried and discharged or punished, or is awaiting trial in the territory of the United Kingdom or in the Republic of Cuba respectively, for the crime for which his extradition is demanded. If the person claimed on the part of His Majesty's Government, or of the Government of Cuba, should be awaiting trial or undergoing sentence for any other crime in the territory of the United Kingdom or in the Republic of Cuba respectively, his extradition shall be deferred until after he has been discharged, whether by acquittal or on expiration of sentence, or otherwise. Article V. Extradition shall not be granted if exemption from prosecution or punishment has been acquired by lapse of time, according to the laws of the State applying or applied to. Neither shall it be granted if, according to the law of either country, the maximum punishment for the offence charged is imprisonment for less than one year. Article VI. A fugitive criminal shall not be surrendered if the offence in respect of which his surrender is demanded is one of a political character, or if he proves that the requisition for his surrender has, in fact, been made with a view to try or punish him for an offence of a political character. Article VII. A person surrendered shall in no case be kept in prison or be brought io trial in the State to which the surrender has been made, for any other crime, or on account of any other matters, than those for which the extradition shall have taken place, until he has been restored, or has had an opportunity of returning to the State by which he has been surrendered. This stipulation does not apply to crimes committed after the extradition. Article VIII. The requisition for extradition shall be made through the diplomatic agents of the high contracting parties respectively.
11
A.—2
The requisition for the extradition of an accused person must be accompanied by a warrant of arrest issued by the competent authority of the State requiring the extradition, and by such evidence as, according to the laws of the place where the accused is found, would justify his arrest if the crime had been committed there. If the requisition relates to a person already convicted, it must be accompanied by a copy of the judgment passed on the convicted person by the competent Court of the State that makes the requisition for extradition. Article IX. If the requisition for .extradition be in accordance with the foregoing stipulations, the competent authorities of the State applied to shall proceed to the arrest of the fugitive. Article X. A criminal fugitive may be apprehended under a warrant issued by any competent authority in either country, on such information or complaint, and such evidence, or after such proceedings, as would, in the opinion of the authority issuing the warrant, justify the issue of a warrant if the crime had been committed or the person convicted in that part of the dominions of the two contracting parties in which the said authority exercises jurisdiction; provided, however, that in the United Kingdom the accused shall, in such case, be sent as speedily as possible before a Police Magistrate. In the Republic of Cuba the Government will decide by administrative procedure on everything connected with extradition until a special procedure on the subject be established by law. Article XI. The extradition shall take place only if the evidence be found sufficient, according to the laws of the State applied to, either to justify the committal of the prisoner for trial, in case the crime had been committed in the territory of the same State, or if extradition is claimed in respect of an offence of which the fugitive has been already convicted, to prove that the prisoner is the person convicted, and that the crime of which he has been convicted is one in respect of .which extradition could, at the time of such conviction, have been granted by the State applied to. Article XII. In the examination which they have to make in accordance with the foregoing stipulations, the authorities of the State applied to shall admit as valid evidence the sworn depositions or the affirmations of witnesses taken in the other State, or copies thereof, and likewise the warrants and sentences issued therein, and certificates of, or judicial documents stating, the fact of a conviction, provided the same are authenticated as follows: — 1. A warrant must purport to be signed by a Judge, Magistrate, or officer of the other State. 2. Depositions or affirmations, or the copies thereof, must purport to be certified, under the hand of a Judge, Magistrate, or officer of the other State, to be the original depositions or affirmations, or to be true copies thereof, as the case may require. 3. A certificate of, or judicial document stating, the fact of a conviction must purport to be certified by a Judge, Magistrate, or officer of the other State. 4. In every case such warrant, deposition, affirmation, copy, certificate, or judicial document must be authenticated, either by the oath of some witness, or by being sealed with the official seal of the Minister of Justice, or some other Minister of the other State ; but any other mode of authentication for the time being permitted by the law of the country where the examination is taken may be substituted for the foregoing. Article XIII. If the individual claimed by one of the high contracting parties in pursuance of the present treaty should be also claimed by one or several other Powers on account of other crimes or offences committed upon their respective territories, his extradition shall be granted to the State whose demand is earliest in date. Article XIV. If sufficient evidence for the extradition be not produced within two months from the date of the apprehension of the fugitive or within such further time as the State applied to, or the proper tribunal thereof, shall direct, the fugitive shall be set at liberty. Article XV. All articles seized which were in the possession of the person to be surrendered at the time of his apprehension shall, if the competent authority of the State applied to for the extradition has ordered the delivery of such articles, be given up when.the extradition takes place; and the said delivery shall extend not merely to the stolen articles, but to everything that may serve as a proof of the crime. Article XT I. All expenses connected with extradition shall be borne by the demanding State. Article XVII. The stipulations of the present treaty shall be applicable to the colonies and foreign possessions of His Britannic Majesty, so far as the "laws in such colonies and foreign possessions respectively will allow. . . . . . The requisition for the surrender of a fugitive criminal, who has taken refuge in any of such colonies or foreign possessions, shall be made to the Governor or chief authority of such colony or possession by the chief consular officer of the Republic of Cuba in such colony or possession.
2*—A. 2.
A.—2.
12
Such requisition may be disposed of, subject always, as nearly as may be, and so far as the law of such colony or foreign possession will allow, to the provisions of this treaty, by the said Governor or chief authority, who, however, shall be at liberty either to grant the surrender or to refer the matter to his Government. His Britannic Majesty shall, however, be at liberty to make special arrangements in the British colonies and foreign possessions for the surrender of Cuban criminals who may take refuge within such colonies and foreign possessions, on the basis, so far as the law of such colony or foreign possessions will allow, of the provisions of the present treaty. Requisitions for the surrender of a fugitive criminal emanating from any colony or foreign possession of His Britannic Majesty shall be governed by rules laid down in the preceding articles of the present treaty. Article XVIII. The present treaty shall come into force ten days after its publication, in conformity with the forms prescribed by the laws of the high contracting parties. It may be terminated by either of the high contracting parties by a notice not exceeding one year, and not less than six months. It shall be ratified, after receiving the approval of the Senate of the Republic of Cuba, and the ratifications shall be exchanged at Havana as soon as possible. In witness whereof the respective plenipotentiaries have signed the same, and affixed thereto their respective seals. Done in duplicate at Havana the third day of October, one thousand nine hundred and four. Lionel Carden. C E. Ortiz. And whereas the ratifications of the said treaty were exchanged at Havana on the tenth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and five: Now, therefore, His Majesty, by and with the advice of His Privy Council, and in virtue of the authority committed to him by the said recited Acts, doth order, and it is hereby ordered, that from and after the twenty-second day of May, one thousand nine hundred and five, the said Acts shall apply in the case of Cuba and of the said treaty with the President of the Republic of Cuba: Provided always that the operation of the said Acts shall be and remain suspended within the Dominion of Canada so long as an Act of the Parliament of Canada passed in one thousand eight hundred and eighty-six, and entitled " An Act respecting the Extradition of Fugitive Criminals," shall continue in force there, and no longer. A. W. Fitzroy.
No. 9. Sir, — Downing Street, 17th June, 1905. With reference to the Earl of Kimberley's circular despatch of the 30th May, 1881, I have the honour to transmit to you, for publication in the colony under your Government, a copy of an Order of His Majesty the King in Council, dated the 29th May, 1905, bringing into operation, as from the 9th instant, a convention between His Britannic Majesty and the Federal Council of the Swiss Confederation, supplementing Article XVIII of the extradition treaty concluded between Great Britain and Switzerland, November 26th, 1880. This supplementary convention was signed at London on the 29th June, 1901, and the ratifications were exchanged at the same place on the 29th March, 1905. I have, &c., ALFRED LYTTELTON. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
Enclosure. Order in Council. —Applying the Extradition Convention of the 29th June, 1904. At the Court at Buckingham Palace, the 29th day of May, 1905. Present: The King's Most Excellent Majesty, Lord President, Lord Steward, Mr. C. B. Stuart-Wortley, Sir W. H. Walrond, Sir A. Nicholson, Sir W. E. Goschen. Whereas by the Extradition Acts, 1870 to 1895, it was amongst other things enacted that, where an arrangement has been made with any foreign State with respect to the surrender to such State of any fugitive criminals, His Majesty may, by Order in Council, direct that the said Acts shall apply in the case of such foreign State, and that His Majesty may, by the same or any subsequent Order, limit the operation of the Order, and restrict the same to fugitive criminals who are in, or suspected of being in, the part of His Majesty's dominions specified in the Order, and render the operation thereof subject to such conditions, exceptions, and qualifications as may be deemed expedient: And whereas a treaty was concluded on the twenty-sixth of November, one thousand eight hundred and eighty, between Her late Majesty Queen Victoria and the Swiss Federal Council for the mutual extradition of fugitive criminals, in the case of which treaty the Extradition Acts of 1870 and 1873 were applied by Order in Council of the eighteenth May, one thousand eight hundred .and eighty-one:
13
A.—2
And whereas a supplementary convention was concluded on the twenty-ninth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and four, between His Majesty and the Federal Council of the Swiss Confederation, amending Article XVIII of the said treaty of the twenty-sixth of November, one thousand eight hundred and eighty, for the mutual extradition of fugitive criminals, which supplementary convention is in the terms following: — " Convention Supplementary Article XVIII of the Extradition Treaty concluded between Great Britain and Switzerland, 26th November, 1880. '' The Government of His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the Federal Council of the Swiss Confederation, having deemed it necessary to extend, so far as regards the relations of Switzerland with the British colonies and foreign possessions, the periods of thirty days and two months respectively fixed by Article 111, paragraph 3, and Article VIII of the treaty concluded on the 26th November, 1880, between Her late Majesty the ■Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Empress of India, &c, and the Swiss Federal Council respecting the extradition of persons accused or condemned, the undersigned, duly authorised to that effect by their respective Governments, have agreed as follows: — " The following stipulation is added to the first paragraph of Article XVIII of the treaty of ■extradition: ' Nevertheless, so far as regards the relations of Switzerland with these colonies and foreign possessions, the period of time fixed by Article 111, paragraph 3, within which the requisition for extradition is to be made through the diplomatic channel, shall be six weeks; and that provided by Article VIII for the production of proof sufficient to warrant the extradition shall be three •calendar months.' "The present Convention shall come into force from the date when the ratifications shall be exchanged. It shall have the same force and duration as the treaty of extradition of the 26th November, 1880, to which it relates. " It shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be exchanged at London as soon as possible." In witness whereof tlie undersigned have signed the present convention, and have affixed their seals thereto. Done at London in duplicate, the twenty-ninth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and four. Lansdowne. Carlin. And whereas the ratifications of the said supplementary convention were exchanged at London on the twenty-ninth day of March, one thousand nine hundred and five: Now, therefore, His Majesty, by and with the advice of His Privy Council, and in virtue of the authority committed to him by the said recited Acts, doth order, and it is hereby ordered, that from and after the ninth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and five, the said Acts shall apply in the case of Switzerland, under and in accordance with the said treaty, as amended by the said supplementary convention above set forth. Provided always that the operation of the said Acts shall be and remain suspended within the Dominion of Canada so long as an Act of the Parliament of Canada passed in one thousand eight hundred and eighty-six, and entitled " An Act respecting the Extradition of Fugitive Criminals," shall continue in force there, and no longer. A. W. Fitzroy.
No. 10. (No. 53.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 15th July, 1905. I have the honour to transmit to you for the information of your Ministers a copy of a. letter from the Foreign Office respecting the message of sympathy with the United States of America on the death of Mr. Hay, conveyed in your telegram of the 3rd instant. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. Governor the Right Hon. Lord ITunket, K.C.M.G., X.C.V.0., &c.
Enclosure. Sir, — Foreign Office, 7th July, 1905. I am directed by the Marquess of Lansdowne to acknowledge the receipt of your letter (23079), of the 3rd instant, forwarding a telegram from the Governor of New Zealand in which he expresses the sympathy of that colony with the United States of America on the death of Mr. Hay. I am to state that a telegram was sent to Sir M. Durand, His Majesty's Ambassador at Washington, on the 3rd instant, conveying Lord Plunket's message, and instructing him to communicate it to the American Government. I am, &c, The Under-Secretary of State, Colonial Office. F. H. Villiers.
A.—2
14
No. 11. (Circular.) Sir,— Downing Street, 17th July, 1905. In continuation of my predecessor's circular despatches of the 20th December, 1898, 15th February, Ist May, and 2nd September, 1899, 30th October and 29th November, 1900, and the 28th April, 1902, respecting the adoption of the Imperial penny-postage scheme by certain colonies, I have the honour to inform you that an arrangement has been concluded with the Government of Australia, under which the Commonwealth postal administration will admit without surcharge letters posted in the United Kingdom or any British colony or possession, postage on which has been prepaid at the rate of Id. per halfounce. The arrangement applies equally to British New Guinea, Lord Howe Island, and Norfolk Island. 2. This reduction will not, however, at present apply to letters from Australia, postage on which to any part of the Empire will be at the rate of 2d. per half-ounce. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
No. 12. (General.) My Lord, — Downing Street, Ist August, 1905. With reference to my predecessor's circular despatch of the 27th March, 1902, forwarding a copy of an Order in Council giving effect to the Anglo-Belgian treaty of the 29th October, 1901, I have the honour to transmit to you for the consideration of your Ministers the accompanying copy of a note from the Belgian Minister at this Court to the Foreign Office, submitting the draft of an additional declaration which the Belgian Government propose to conclude to complete the treaty. 2. I shall be glad to learn at an early date whether your Government have any objection to offer to this proposal, and I Avould at the same time suggest that, in the event of their concurrence, a general assent to similar alterations which may be required in any other extradition treaties may be given. 3. A copy of the supplementary extradition treaty with Switzerland, to which allusion is made in Count Lalaing's note, was enclosed in my circular despatch of the 17th June last. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. Governor the Right Hon. Lord Plunket, K.C.M.G., X.C.V.0., &c.
Enclosure. Monsieur lb Marquis,— Londres, le 13 Juillet, 1905. La question de l'extradition, par rapport aux colonies, est reglee en cc gui concerne la Grande Bretagne et la Belgique par I'article 14 de la Convention Anglo-Beige dv 29 Octobre, 1901, mais cet article ne stipule 4 et 5. 11 y a la une lacune que Gouvernement Beige desirerait voir combler, a Finstar de cc gui a etc fait recomment a cc point de vue special, par un accord entre la Grande Bretagne et la Suisse. En effet, une convention a etc signee le 29 Juin, 1904, entre la Royaume Uni de la Grande Bretagne et d'lrlande et la Suisse, aux fins de completer Particle 18 dv traite d'extradition Anglo-Suisse dv 26 Novembre, 1880, gui ne prevoyait pas de delai d'abord pour la production de la requete d'extradition en cas d'arrestation provisoire, ensuite pour la production de preuves supplementaires. Je suis done charge par le Gouvernement dv Roi de soumettre au Gouvernement de Sa Majeste Britannique un projet de declaration additionnelle au traite d'extradition Anglo-Beige dv 29 Octobre, 1901, projet que j'ai l'honneur de faire parvenir a Votre Seigneurie sous cc pli en la priant de bien vouloir l'examiner. Je saisis cette occasion de renouveler a Votre Seigneurie les assurances, &c. Monsieur le Marquis de Lansdowne, K.G., &c. Lalaing. Le Gouvernement de Sa Majeste le Roi dcs Beiges et le Gouvernement de Sa Majeste le Roi dv RoyaumeUni de la Grande Bretagne et d'lrlande, ayant juge necessaire de completer I'article 14 dv traite d'extradition entre la Belgique et la Grande Bretagne dv 29 Octobre, 1901, relatif a l'application aux colonies • et possessions etrangeres dcs deux Ftats hors d'Europe dcs stipulations dv traite, les soussignes, dument autorises a cet effet par leurs Gouvernements respectifs, sont convenus de cc gui suit: -V
15
A.—2
Dans les rapports de chacune dcs hautes parties contractantes avec les colonies et possessions etrangeres de I'autre, situees hors d'Europe, les delais prevus par les articles 4, alinea I, et 5 de la convention dv 29 Octobre, 1901, seront prolonges comme suit : (1.) Le criminel fugitif arrete aux termes de l'article 4 sera relache, dans les Etats de Sa Majeste Britannique, si, dans le delai de deux mois a dater de son arrestation, une demande d'extradition n'a pas etc faite par le Gouvernement dv pays requerant; dans les Etats de Sa Majeste le Roi dcs Beiges, si, dans le mome delai, il ne recoit communication dv mandat delivra par i'autorite competente. (2.) L'individu arrete sera mis en liberte si endeans les trois mois a partir de la date de I'arrestation, les documents suffisants a I'appui de la demande d'extradition n'ont pas etc produits. La presente convention entrera en vigueur dcs que les ratifications en aurent etc echangees. Elle aura la merae force et la meme duree que le traite d'extradition auquel elle se refere. Elle sera ratifiee et les instruments de ratification on seront echanges a aussitot que possible. En foi de quoi les soussignes ont signe la presente convention et y ont appose leur sceau. Fait en double original a le
No. 13. (General.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 3rd August, 1905. I have the honour to transmit to you the accompanying copy of a letter from the British Medical Association communicating a resolution to the effect that it was expedient that only those medical qualifications which are available for registration in Great Britain and Ireland should be so available in Australia, and to inform you that copies of this letter were, at the instance of the Association, forwarded for consideration by the Governments of the various Australian States. 2. The British Medical Association have now explained that it was their desire that the views of the Government of New Zealand on the resolution, the terms of which were intended to include that colony, should be invited. 3. I have therefore to request that your Ministers may be asked for an expression of their views on this subject. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. Governor the Right Hon. Lord Plunket, K.C.M.G., X.C.V.0., &c.
Enclosure. Sin, — British Medical Association, 429 Strand, London, W.C., 19th July, 1904. At a recent meeting of the British Medical Association a resolution was passed: "That, in the opinion of the Council, it is expedient that only those medical qualifications which are available for registration in Great Britain and Ireland be registrable in Australia." 1 was instructed to forward a copy of this resolution to you, with a respectful request that copies may be transmitted to the Australian Governments for their consideration. The Council in arriving at its decision feels confident that the introduction of such a regulation would have advantageous results for the general public and the medical profession in Australia. Doubtless you are aware that while medical men possessed of foreign qualifications can practise in Australia after undergoing certain formalities, men with medical qualifications acquired in Australia do not enjoy corresponding privileges if they should desire to practise in a foreign country. I am, &c, Guy Elliston, General Secretary. The Right Hon. the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Colonial Office. S.W.
No. 14. (No. 58.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 16th August, 1905. I have the honour to transmit to you for the consideration of your Ministers the accompanying copy of a letter from the War Office regarding the visit of Brevet Lieut.-Colonel G. M. Kirkpatrick to the Antipodes in order to study strategic conditions and the local military systems, and I have to ask that, in accordance with the request of the Army Council, full facilities may be accorded to him during his stay in New Zealand. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. Governor the Right Hon. Lord Plunket, X.C.V.0., &c.
A.—2
16
Enclosure. Sir,— War Office, London, S.W., 4th August, 1905. I am commanded by the Army Council to ask you to bring it to the notice of Mr. Lyttelton that Brevet Lieut.-Colonel G. M. Kirkpatrick, of the general staff, has been directed to visit the Antipodes in order to study on the spot the strategic conditions and the local military systems. I am to request that the Governments of the Commonwealth and New Zealand may be asked to give this officer all facilities in the carrying out of this duty. He expects to sail from Marseilles by the P. and 0., leaving on the 3rd November, and should arrive at Perth, where he proposes to disembark, about the 30th November. I have, &c, The Under-Secretary of State, Colonial Office. E. W. D. Ward.
No. 15. (No. 60.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 19th August, 1905. I have the honour to transmit to you for the information of your Ministers the paper noted in the subjoined schedule. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
Enclosure. Sin, — Admiralty, 11th August, 1905. I am commanded by my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to request you will inform the Secretary of State that Vice-Admiral Sir Wilmot Hawksworth Fawkes, X.C.V.0., has been appointed to succeed Vice-Admiral Sir A. D. Fanshawe as Commander-in-Chief of His Majesty's ships and vessels on the Australian station. I am, <fee, The Under-Secretary of State, Colonial Office. C. J. Thomas.
No. 16. (No. 61.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 24th August, 1905. With reference to my telegram of the Ist instant, I have the honour to forward, for the information of your Ministers, the accompanying copy of a despatch from His Majesty's Ambassador at Washington, stating that a note has been received from the United States Acting-Secretary of State requesting that an expression of his Government's deep appreciation of the message of sympathy sent by your Ministers on the occasion of the death of Mr. Hay might be conveyed to your Government. I have &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. Governor the Right Hon. Lord Plunket, X.C.V.0., &c.
Enclosure. My Lord, — British Embassy, Lenox, Massachusetts, 14th July, 1905. On the receipt of your Lordship's telegram (No. 94), I conveyed to the United States Government the message of sympathy sent by the Government of New Zealand on the occasion of the death of Mr. Hay. The Acting-Secretary of State has now addressed me a note requesting that an expression of his Government's deep appreciation of this sympathetic message may be transmitted through the appropriate channels to the Governor of New Zealand. I have, etc., The Marquess of Lansdowne, K.G., &c. H. M. Durand.
Date. From. To * i T~ Subject. ' ~r~ " " ~~ 11 August, 1905 .. Admiralty .. ; Colonial Office .. i Appointment of Commander-in-Chief on the Australian Station.
17
A.—2
No. 17. (Circular.) Sir, — Downing Street, 31st August, 1905. I have the honour to communicate to you, with a view to the attention of traders in the colony being drawn to the matter, the following representations made by His Majesty's Consul in Buenos Aires in a despatch to the Foreign Office, respecting the registration of trade-marks in the Argentine Republic. Mr. Consul Ross suggests from what has come under his notice that the importance of registration in the Republic of marks well known and therefore valuable is not understood or appreciated by the British merchant either in the United Kingdom or in the colonies. He states that, according to the Argentine law, it is permissible for any one to register in the Republic a trade-mark for one class or for any number of different classes of goods, provided that mark has not already been registered in that country; that the cost of registration, including agents' fees, is about £10, and the time necessary to obtain registration about six weeks, and tha/t registration gives protection for about ten years. Attention is called to the serious disadvantage which may result from nonregistration. A person not necessarily being the real owner of a particular trade-mark, but having registered that mark in the Argentine, can lay an embargo on any goods he may find bearing that mark, although such goods may have been made by the original owner of the mark and have been legitimately introduced into the country. An instance is given of the case of a Canadian firm which has been selling for some years under a special mark, and now finds that it may not import its own goods into the Argentine Republic under that mark because it has been registered by a firm of importers in Buenos Aires; and, so far as the Consul can learn, there is no remedy except for the original owners to buy up the local registered owner of the mark, unless the manufacturer is prepared to invent and push another trade-mark. Registration in the Argentine Republic can be effected by an agent acting under a power of attorney in the form enclosed, which should be certified to by an Argentine Consul; and His Majesty's Consul at Buenos Aires has declared his willingness to furnish the name of a reliable patent agent in that city. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
No. 18. (General.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 21st September, 1905. With reference to my circular despatch of the 20th June last respecting the form of licenses for the establishment of wireless-telegraphy stations, I have the honour to transmit to you, to be laid before your Ministers, a copy of a letter from the General Post Office with regard to certain statements which have recently been observed in the Press as to the contemplated establishment of wireless communication between Australia and New Zealand. I shall be glad if you will invite your Ministers to be good enough to comply with the requests of the Postmaster-General. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. Governor the Right Hon. Lord Plunket, K.C.M.G., X.C.V.0., &c.
Enclosure. Sir, — General Post Office, London, 12th September, 1905. I am directed by the Postmaster-General to say, for the information of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, that he has recently observed statements in the Press to the effect that arrangements have been made for the establishment of wireless telegraph communication between Australia and New Zealand, at a cost of £28,000; and also that negotiations have been taking place between the Government of Natal and the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company for the establishment of a wireless station at Durban, but that as these negotiations have been unsuccessful other arrangements are now contemplated.
3—A. 2.
A.—2
18
In view of the interest of this Department in wireless telegraphy, the Postmaster-General would be much obliged if Mr. Secretary Lyttelton would be so good as to cause him to be informed, iifter communication with the colonial Governments if necessary, whether these statements are correct. He would also be glad to be put in possession of any further particulars which can be furnished on the subject, and more especially to learn what system of wireless telegraphy it is proposed to adopt in each case. He understands that Mr. Lyttelton has recently requested, in circular letters to the selfgoverning colonies, that His Majesty's Government may be given an opportunity of offering -their observations on any application for the installation of a wireless telegraph system which may possibly communicate with similar systems in foreign countries, and that the Governors of the other colonies have been asked not to grant or promise any license for wireless telegraphy without previous reference to the Secretary of State. Lord Stanley ventures to assume that applications referred to the Colonial Office in accordance with these requests will be communicated to him, either directly or through the medium of the Cables (Landing Rights) Committee. He thinks it desirable, however, if Mr. Lyttelton sees no objection, that these arrangements should be carried a step further, and that the Governments of the self-governing colonies should be asked to inform the Colonial Office from time to time of any new stations which may be established or of any important development in connection with wireless telegraphy which may arise within their jurisdiction. I am to add that His Majesty's representatives in foreign countries have already been instructed by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to report from time to time on these points in respect of the countries to which they are accredited, and that their reports are communicated in due course to this Department. 1 am, &c, The Under-Secretary of State, Colonial Office. A. F. King.
No. 19. (No. 71.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 13th October, 1905. No. c. With reference to my despatch (No. 35) of the sth May, I have the honour to acquaint you for the information of your Ministers that I have received from the Hon. Walter Rothschild, M.P., a letter drawing attention to the extermination of penguins and other sea-birds which is taking place in the Antipodes, Auckland, Bounty, and Campbell Islands. 2. From the debate in the Legislative Council on the 6th July last, I see that your Government promised full inquiry into the matter, and I shall be glad to learn the result of the investigation. I have, &c, ALFRED LYTTELTON. Governor the Right Hon. Lord Plunket, X.C.V.0., &c.
No. 20. (Circular.) Sir, — Downing Street, 11th December, 1905. I have the honour to inform you that His Majesty has been pleased this day to intrust to my care, as one of the Principal Secretaries of State, the Seals of the Colonial Department. I have, &c, ELGIN. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
No. 21. . (Circular.) Sir, — Downing Street, 16th December, 1905. I have the honour to state, for the information of your Ministers, that His Majesty's Government have been formally notified that the Union of Sweden with Norway has been dissolved, and that they have taken official recognition of Norway as a separate Kingdom. 2. His Majesty's Government has also received from the Swedish Legation in London an intimation that the treaties concluded in common by Sweden and Norway will be considered as valid by the Swedish Government until further notice by that Government, but that the Swedish Government cannot accept any further responsibility for any obligations contained in such treaties so far as the State of Norway is concerned.
19
A.— 'A
3. A similar communication has been received from the Norwegian representative in London, intimating that the Government of Norway recognises its obligations under the treaties concluded in common by the two States, but repudiates any obligation as regards such treaties so far as Sweden is concerned. 4. The replies of His Majesty's Government to these communications gladly take note of the desire of the Governments of the two States that their respective arrangements should remain in force pending a further study of the subject, but observe that the dissolution of the Union undoubtedly affords His Majesty's Government the right to examine, de novo, the treaty arrangements by which Great Britain was bound to the dual monarchy. I have, &c, ELGIN. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
No. 22. (No. 2.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 4th January, 1906. I have the honour to inform you that His Majesty will not be advised to exercise his powers of disallowance with respect to the Act, No. 49 of 1905, of the Legislature of New Zealand entitled " An Act to provide for the Holding of an International Exhibition at Christchurch," a transcript of which accompanied your despatch (No. 75) of the 16th November last. I have, &c, ELGIN. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
A.-1, 1905, No. 17.
No. 23. (No. 3.) My Lord, — Downing Street, Ilth January, 1906. I have the honour to inform you that His Majesty will not be advised to exercise his power of disallowance with respect to the following Acts of the Parliament of New Zealand, transcripts of which accompanied your despatch (No. 75) of the 16th November last. I have, &c, ELGIN. Governor the Right Hon. Lord Plunket, K.C.M.G., X.C.V.0., &c [For list of Acts see Gazette No. 18, of Bth March, 1906.]
A.-l, 1905, No. 17.
No. 24. (No. 12.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 22nd February, 1906. I have the honour to inform you that His Majesty will not be advised to exercise his powers of disallowance with respect to the Act, No. 41 of 1905, of the Parliament of New Zealand entitled "An Act to amend ' The Australian and New Zealand Naval Defence Act, 1903,'" a transcript of which accompanied your despatch (No. 75) of the 16th November last. I have, &c, ELGIN. The Officer Administering the Government of New Zealand.
A.-l, 1905, No. 17.
No. 25. (No. 14.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 23rd February, 1906. I have the honour to transmit to you, for the information of your Ministers, one sealed copy and six plain copies of an Order in Council declaring His Majesty's assent to the reserved Bill, No. 63 of 1905, of the Legislature of New Zealand entitled "An Act to amend ' The Shipping and Seamen Act, 1903,'" a transcript of which accompanied your despatch (No. 75) of the 16th November last. I have, &c, ELGIN. Governor the Right Hon. Lord Plunket, K.C.M.G., &c
A.-l, 1905 No. 17.
A.—2
20
Enclosure. At the Court at Buckingham Palace, the 16th day of February, 1906. Present: The King's Most Excellent Majesty, Lord President, Lord Privy Seal, Duke of Manchester, Lord Steward, Earl Beauchamp, Lord Reay, Mr. Secretary Gladstone, Mr. John Sinclair, Mr. E. Robertson, Mr. H. Labouchere, Lord Justice Moulton, Sir Maurice de Bunsen. Whereas by an Act passed in the session held in the fifteenth and sixteenth years of Her late Majesty's reign, entitled " An Act to grant a Representative Constitution to the Colony of New Zealand," it is, amongst other things, declared that no Bill which shall be reserved for the signification of Her Majesty's pleasure thereon shall have any force or authority within the Colony of New Zealand until the Governor of the said colony shall signify, either by speech or message to the Legislative Council and House of Representatives of the said colony, or by Proclamation, that such Bill has been laid before Her Majesty in Council, and that Her Majesty has been pleased to assent to the same: And whereas a certain Bill passed by the Legislative Council and House of Representatives of the said colony, entitled " An Act to amend ' The Shipping and Seamen Act, 1903,' " was presented to the officer administering the Government of the said colony for His Majesty's assent: And whereas the said Bill was reserved by the said officer for the signification of His Majesty's pleasure thereon: And whereas the said Bill so reserved as aforesaid has been laid before His Majesty in Council, and it is expedient that the said Bill should be assented to by His Majesty: Now, therefore, His Majesty, in pursuance of the said Act, and in exercise of the power thereby reserved to His Majesty as aforesaid, doth by this present Order, by and with the advice of His Majesty's Privy Council, declare His assent to the said Bill. A. W. Fitzroy.
No. 26. • (No. 15.) My Lord, — Downing Street, 23rd February, 1906. I have the honour to transmit to you, for the information of your Government, one sealed and six plain copies of an Order in Council declaring His Majesty's assent to the reserved Bill of the Legislature of New Zealand, No. 64 of 1905, entitled " An Act to validate Certain Marriages," copies of which were enclosed in your despatch (No. 75) of the 16th November last, I have, &c, ELGIN. Governor the Right Hon. Lord Plunket, K.C.M.G., X.C.V.0., &c.
A.-l, 1905 No 17.
Enclosure. At the Court at Buckingham Palace, the 16th day of February, 1906. Present: The King's Most Excellent Majesty, Lord President, Lord Privy Seal, Duke of Manchester, Lord Steward, Earl Beauchamp, Lord Reay, Mr. Secretary Gladstone, Mr. John Sinclair, Mr. E. Robertson, Mr. H. Labouchere, Lord. Justice Moulton, Sir Maurice de Bunsen. Whereas by an Act passed in the session held in the fifteenth and sixteenth years of Her late Majesty's reign, entitled " An Act to grant a Representative Constitution to the Colony of New Zealand," it is, amongst other things, declared that no Bill which shall be reserved for the signification of Her Majesty's pleasure thereon shall have any force or authority within the Colony of New Zealand until the Governor of the said colony shall signify, either by speech or message to the Legislative Council and House of Representatives of the said colony, or by Proclamation, that such Bill has been laid before Her Majesty in Council, and that Her Majesty has been pleased to assent to the same: And whereas a certain Bill passed by the Legislative Council and House of Representatives of the said colony, entitled " An Act to validate Certain Marriages " (No. 64 of 1905), was presented to the officer administering the Government of the said colony for His Majesty's assent: And whereas the said Bill was reserved by the said officer for the signification of His Majesty's pleasure thereon : And whereas the said Bill so reserved as aforesaid has been laid before His Majesty in Council, and it is expedient that the said Bill should be assented to by His Majesty: Now, therefore, His Majesty, in pursuance of the said Act, and in exercise of the power thereby reserved to His Majesty as aforesaid, doth by this present Order, by and with the advice of His Majesty's Privy Council', declare His assent to the said Bill. A. W. Fitzroy.
Approximate Cost of Paper.— Preparation, not given; printing (1,450 copies}, £9 9s. 6d.
Authority: John Mackai, Government Printer, Wellington.—l9o6.
Price 9d.]
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/parliamentary/AJHR1906-I.2.1.2.2
Bibliographic details
DESPATCHES FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES TO THE GOVERNOR OF NEW ZEALAND., Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1906 Session I, A-02
Word Count
13,769DESPATCHES FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES TO THE GOVERNOR OF NEW ZEALAND. Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1906 Session I, A-02
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in