THE LEEWARD ISL
Oiublisbeb bp atuttoritt.
THURSDAY, 24TH APRIL, 1952.
It is notified for general informa-
tion that Senor GERVASTO VIDELA
DORNA has been appointed as Consul-
General of the Argentine Republic
pin .London with jurisdiction includ-
ing the United Kingdom Overseas
Territories not already within the
jurisdiction of an Argentine consular
17th April, 1952.
Ref. No. 19/00001.
The Governor has been pleased
under section 3 of the Leeward
Islands Quarantine Act. 1944, as
amended by Leeward Islands Act
No. 10 of 1950, to appoint Dr. H. D.
WEATHERHEAD, O.B.E., Senio r
Medical Officer, Antigua, to be the
Quarantine Authority for that
Presidency, in place of Dr. L. R.
WYNTER, M.B.E., from the 1st April,
23rd April, 1952.
The Governor has been pleased
under Section 3 of the Leeward
Islands Quarantine Act, 1944, as
amended by Leeward Islands Act
No. 10 of 1950, to appoint Dr. J. D.
ROSANELLI, M e d i c a I Officer in
Administrative Charge, V i r gin
Islands, to be Quarantine Authority
for that Presidency, in place of
Dr. W. T. JOSEPH, from the 1st Janu-
23rd April, 1952.
(In substitution for the Notice
appearing in the Leeward Islands
Gazette of the 17th April, 1952.)
The Administrator of Antigua has No. 45.
been pleased to reappoint Mr. S. T.
CHRISTIAN, O.B.E., B.A., LL.M. to The f
be Chairman of the Commissioners introduce
for the City of St. John for a period of Anti
of one year from 6th April, 1952. Gazette
Administrator's Ofice, "' The A
10th April, 1952
Ref. No. A. 50/16.
His Excellency the Governor has
approved, of the following re-appoint-
ments and appointments of Members
of the Central Housing Authority
under section 4 of the Slum Clearance
and Housing Ordinance 1948 (No. 3
of 1948) from the 1st April, 1952.
Recommended by the Legislative
Council of Antigua.
B. T. CARROT, Esq.
N. H. RICHARDS, Esq.
ERNEST OLIVER, Esq.
The Federal Engineer (Chairman).
A. E. PETERS, Esq., M.B.E.
J. H. HALLPIKE, Esq.
JOHN IRELAND, Esq.
21st April, 1952.
Ref. No. A. 13/12.
Appointments and transfers, etc.,
in the public service, with effect from
the dates stated, are published for
DIAS, B. F., Acting Magistrate, Anti-
gua, to act as Crown Attorney Anti-
gua, in conjunction with his sub-
stantive duties during the absence
on leave of the Crown Attorney from
21st April to 31st May inclusive.
The Secretary of State for the
Colonies has informed the Governor
that the power of disallowance will
not be exercised in respect of the
No. 5 of 1952, "The Supplemen-
tary Appropriation (1948) Ordinance,
following Bill which is to be
led in the Legislative Council
gua, is circulated with this
and forms part thereof:-
erodromes Ordinance, 1952."
Statement of Currency Note
Circulation in the British
Caribbean Territories (East-
ern Group) on 1st April,
Average Circulation during February,
Br. Caribbean Notes $34,800,655
Gov't Currency Notes $8,017,305
British Caribbean Notes:-
Trinidad & Tobago
Total Br. Caribbean
Trinidad and Tobago
Br. Guiana Government
Total circulation on
L 4. 52.
The British Caribbean
Port of Spain,
Ref. No. 24/00027.
(In substitution for the Iv ot ice
appearing in the Leeward Islands 43
Gazette of the 17th April 1952.) o. .
THE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE.
[24 April, 1952.
In the Supreme courtt of the
Windward Islands and
A. D. 1951.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that
in pursuance of Rules made by the
Chief Justice under Section 16 of the
Windward Islands and Leeward Is-
lainds (Courts) Order in Council, 1939,
and duly approved as therein provi-
ded on tne 16th day of October A. D"
1941, the Honourable the Chief Jus-
tice selected for the sitting of the Court
in the Antigua Circuit has appointed
th d(ay of the month on which the
ensuing Circuit Court shall sit as
follows, tllt is to say:-
The Antliua Circuit on Tuesday
th-. 13th t iy of May, 1952, at ten
o'clock in ihe forenoon.
Dated the 21st day of April, 1952.
A. R. MEADE,
Acting Registrar. of the
City Rate for 1952.
Notice is hereby given that the City
Rate Assessment List for 1952 has
been posted on the outer door of the
Treasury and at the City Commis-
The rate fixed on properties north
of the houses bordering on Alfred
Peters Street under an assessed
annual rental value of $48.00 is 5%
and of $18.00 and over 71%. The
rate on all other property under an
assessed annual rental value of $48.00
is 10% and of $48.00 and over 15%
Any person who objects to any
assessment in the said list must lodge
his objection in writing with the City
Clerk within fourteen days after the
date of this notice.
W. L. MAGUIRE.
City Commissioners' Offoie,
15th April, 1952.
Senior Master, Grammar
Applications are invited for one
vacant post of Senior Master, Gram-
mar School, Dominica, B W.I. The
School roll at present numbers 150,
and courses will be offered up to the
Higher School Certificate examination
of Cambridge University.
2. Qualifications. Applicants for
Sthe post should hold a University
degree and qualified to teach Mathe-
matics up to Higher School Certifi-
3. Emoluments. The post is pen-
sionable and carries a salary in the
scale $1920 by $120 to $2400 per
annum. A temporary cost-of-living
allowance is payable at the rate of
twenty per cent. of salary. The can-
didate selected may be appointed at
any point in the scale according to
qualifications and experience.
4. Quarters. Quarters are not
5. Leave. Leave is earned in
accordance with local regulations and
provision is made for assistance to-
wards overseas leave passages.
6. Passages. Free passages to
Dominica to take up appointment are
provided for the officer and for his
wife and children if they accompany
him or follow him within twelve
months from the date of his appoint-
7. Conditions of Service. The
officer will be subject to Colonial
Regulations and Local General Orders.
Applications stating the applicant's
age, qualifications and teaching ex-
perience, and indicating the earliest
date on which he could assume duty,
accompanied by testimonials and
references should be addressed to the
Establishment Officer, Government
Office, Dominica, B.W.I.
Applications from members of the
Government Service of any Colony
should be transmitted through the
officer Administering the Govern-
ment of that Colony.
Ref. No 13/00004.
Applications are invited for two
posts of Agricultural Assistant in
St. Lucia for a period of two
years. The salary and allowances
are payable from Colonial Develop-
ment and Welfare Scheme D.1735
1 Senior Agricultural Assistant
700 per annum.
1 Junior Agriciltural Assistant
600 per annum.
(These posts are both non-
Cost of living allowance 80 p.a.
Transportation and subsistence at
SSenior at Roseau
Accommo- 70 p.a.
nation Junior at Dennery
Passages for the officer and wife
will be paid on first appoint-
ment and on the completion of
the two year engagement.
2. The main duties of the officers
will be to increase sugar production
by advising peasants in up to date
methods of improving sugar cane
cultivation. Previous experience in
sugar cultivation is therefore essential.
3. It is also proposed that a Cane
Farmers Association be formed in the
closest co-operation with the Sugar
Factories management and that a
revolving fund for the purchase of
fertisilers will be initially adminis-
tered by them.
4. The senior officer will be
required to live in the Rosean--ul
de Sac area and the junior officer
in the Dennery area.
5. The officers will work with the
Sugar Agronomist to the Develop-,
ment and Welfare Organisation and
will be in charge under his direction
of all sugar cane experimental work
planned by the Agronomist for all
the sugar growing areas.
6. Applications which should show
the previous experience and qualifica-
tions of the applicant should be
addressed to the Administrator,
St. Lucia, and must be received
before 10th May.
9th April, 1952.
Ref. No. A.C. 13/89.
Creation of a post of Executive
Officer to a Secondary
The Government of Antigua is con-
sidering the creation of a post of
Executive Officer to a Secondary In-
dustries Board which is shortly to be
established. The duties of the Execu-
tive Officer will include supervision
of a Cotton Ginnery, a cornmeal
factory, an arrowroot mill and a can-
nery. In addition the Officer will be
required to advise the Board on the
technical aspects of any further secon-
dary industries which may be intro-
duced in the Presidency.
These industries will be on a small
scale and it is not expected that the
Executive Officer should be an expert
in all of them. He should be a
practical man with a knowledge of
electricity and machinery, with ability
to control and train staff, and with
sufficient knowledge of simple ac-
counting to be able to take managerial
charge in the initial stages of any
industry which may be established.
He should be willing to turn his hand
to anything and to have a pioneer-
The appointment would be for three
years, with provision for six months
leave at the end of that period. It
would not be pensionable. It would
carry a salary of not more than 900
per annum, and a transport allowance.
It is anticipated that the post will be
created by the middle of 1952; and,
if it is finally decided to make this
appointment, the selected candidate
will be required to assume duty in
In the meantime, persons desirous
of being considered for the post (if
created) are invited to submit applica-
tions to the Administrator of Antigua
stating age, education, and a full
record of past experience and present
employment. Testimonials need not
be forwarded at this stage.
Ref. No. A. 42137.
Central Experiment Station,
1948. 1949. 1950. 1951. 1952
2'82 1560 5641 3"60 2'41
'57 2'07 2'52 1'88 1'60
1'89 5'52 1'58 1'09 1'62
*36 '17 2'22 '47 "80
5"64 9'26 1173 7T04 6'4S
THE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE.
In the Supreme Court of the Windward Islands and
(1951 B. Nos. 1 & 2)
HORATIO C. BARBER Plaintiff
ROBERT LLEWELLYN BRADSHAW
JOSEPH NATHANIEL FRANCE
AUSTIN EDDY and
JOSEPH WALLACE alias STEAMER Defendants
HORATIO C. BARBER Plaintiff
PAUL SOUTHWELL Defendant
(Consolidated by order dated the 30th November, 1951.)
1. On June 10th, 1951, the defendants entered on lands in the possession of the plaintiff
and bathed in a stream flowing through the said land. They are sued in this action for, inter alia,
damages for trespass.
2. The defendants admit the entry and seek to justify it on three grounds.
(a) that the plaintiff was not il possession;
(b) that the stream was the property of the Government, to which all members of the
public had a right of access from time immemorial;
(c) that the members of the public have by custom a right to pass over the lands
abutting on the said stream on the North side thereof for the purpose of entering into the
said hot stream.
.3. Ground (a) was but faintly suggested and was not pressed. There was evidence that
at all material times the plaintiff was in possession. There was no evidence in support of Ground (b),
save that the Public Health Department took an interest in keeping the stream clean. As regards
Ground (c) it stated a proposition of law which is untenable. The public cannot have any right by
custom. The result was that there was no defence to the action for trespass; the plaintiff was entitled
4. Mr. Davis, in opening the case for the defendants, still insisted on a right vested in the
public by custom. His senior counsel Mr. Christian, was however alive to the impossibility of this
being successfully contended; and intervened to say that the custom as stated in the pleadings was no
longer relied on by the defendants. The custom relied on applied to the inhabitants of Nevis only;
He admitted that the defendants were not inhabitants of Nevis; he said they were invited by the
inhabitants of Nevis and were consequently entitled to the benefit of the custom.
5. No application to amend the defence was made; this change of front was not open to the
defendants. Counsel for the plaintiff, however, made no objection; I shall therefore deal with the
defence as now suggested.
G. Mr. Christian cited no authority to support his contention that an invitation to the defendants
brought them within the ambit of the custom. Mr. Boon, for the plaintiff, referred to the note of an
authority in 45 English and Empire Digest, page 376, No. 38. It is not necessary, however, to
consider whether Mr. Christian's proposition is supported by authority; the facts show that there had
been nothing that could be described as an invitation, and that the action of the defendants had been
spontaneous and deliberate and carried out with the object of showing, not that the inhabitants of Nevis
had a customary right, but that the people of the Presidency of St. Kitts, Nevis and Anguilla had the
right. In a speech at Warner Park in St. Kitts on the 10th September, 1950, the defendant
Mr. Bradshaw, having referred to attempts by the plaintiff to regulate the use of the stream and of
assurances by the plaintiff not to interfere with people bathing in the stream, admits ti at he said
" I accepted the assurance but that in order to make it plain and clear to the whole wnrld that the
people of this Presidency of St. Kitts, Nevis and Anguilla have the right of free access to bathe in
the stream my Union would organise a bathing party to bathe in the stream at a later date". The
evidence makes it clear that this bathing party was organised by Mr. Bradshaw's union n for the
10th June, 1951; and that the entry of the defendants on the plaintiff's land on that date was the
result of what Mr. Bradshaw had planned. Mr. Gordon, a member for Nevis on the Legislative
Council, had been instrumental in support of such a bathing party; but this is better described as an
instigation. if any instigation wns necessary.
24 April, 1952]
THE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE.
7. Assuming, as Mr. Christian has contended, that the inhabitants of Nevis have a right by
custom to enter on the plaintiff's land and bathe in the stream running through that land, I hold that
the defendants, not being inhabitants of Nevis, have no such right and did not acquire any such right
by invitation. They are consequently liable to damages for trespass.
8. There was a further allegation that the defendants had conspired to trespass. In
Sorrel v. Smith, 1925, A.C., 700 Lord Dunedin said "The first and obvious observation is that if
a combination of persons do what if done by one would be a tort, an averment of conspiracy so far as
founding a civil action is mere surplusage." This allegation of conspiracy need not therefore be
considered save as regards the question of damages.
9. The defendants are also sued for conspiracy to compel the plaintiff to leave the island
of Nevis and to abandon his projects for the developments of his lands.
10. The plaintiff had in 1947 purchased the Bath Hotel and its grounds in Nevis. His
purpose was to make Nevis an attractive tourist resort. He also purchased land in the vicinity of the
hotel with the purpose of dividing it into lots for the creation of a residential estate. Through the
grounds of the hotel there ran a stream reputed to have medicinal and therapeutic virtue. At the
time of the purchase he was aware that members of the public were in the habit of bathing in
that pal t of the stream which ran through his land. He has consistently maintained that this is
permissive, that is, it is a privilege granted by former owners and by himself. He has had no desire
to withdraw this privilege; but he sought to regulate it. It clearly needed regulating, as many
members bathed in a nude state and in a part of the stream which was visible from the front of the
hotel. He consequently put up notices forbidding the public to enter the land at one point, another
notice pointing out the correct spot at which his land might be entered; and a third notice forbidding
further progress through the land. This last notice was an endeavour to secure that persons did not
bathe nude in full view of the hotel. At a point not visible from the hotel he erected a concrete bath
for the use of the public, with the hope that it would be used, and thus make it unnecessary for bathers
to come directly under the observation of residents in the hotel.
11. Some persons in Nevis conceive all these measures to be an invasion of their rights,
with the consequence that the plaintiff became nnp )pular; the notices were removed and the concrete
bath was destroyed. It was in consequence of them that the bathing party, already referred to, was
organised. Mr. Boon has asked me to regard this bathing party as part of a conspiracy to compel the
plaintiff to leave Nevis. I cannot accede to this; it was not pleaded as the result of such a conspiracy.
12. The evidence as to the conspiracy that is alleged is contained in a speech made by
Mr. Bradshaw on the 10th June, 1951, after the bathing party referred to above. As to what was said
by Mr. Bradshaw I prefer to rely on the evidence of the plaintiff and of a witness named' Taylor.
Mr. Bradshaw referred to the plaintiff as an alien who had come to Nevis to take away the people's
rights. He advised his hearers to go on the plaintiff's lands; to boo and insult the plaintiff wherever
he went and to drive him out of the island. There was much in the same strain; with pointed
references to some one from Barbados who had also become unpopular and left Nevis in consequence,
and to an oil company in Iran which had to relinq ished business in that country. The allegation is
that the other six defendants conspired with Mr. Bradshaw in his instructions to the audience to deal
with the plaintiff in this harsh manner.
13. The evidence is that the defendants France, Liburd, Williams, Southwell and Eddy were
in the pavilion with Mr. Bradshaw at Stoney Grove Park when he made this speech. Mr. Boon urged
that this is evidence that they agreed with Mr. Bradshaw and that they concurred in his advice to the
people. The defendants France and Southwell gave evidence; they did not admit the inflammatory
nature of Mr. Bradshaw's speech; nor did they admit that they would have agreed with it, if its con-
tents had been as I have found. Neither Mr. Boon nor Mr. Christian cited any authority on this point;
but Mr. Christian urged that this evidence alone could not be held to prove a conspiracy.
14. The question of aiding and abetting was considered in the case of Wilcox v. Jeffery, 1951,
1 All. E. R. 464, Briefly, the facts were that one H. had been allowed to land in the United Kingdom
on condition that he would not take any employment, paid or unpaid. H. was a musician and was met
at the air-port by Wilcox; and Wilcox was aware of the condition. Subsequently H. did perform at a
public entertainment. Wilcox was present and wrote a eulogy of H's performance in a musical period-
ical. It was held that he was guilty of aiding and abetting H. in the breach of the condition. Lord
Goddard, at page 466 cited Cave, J., in R. v. Coney, 8 Q. B. D. 534 (at page 540)
" Where presence may be entirely accidental, it is not even evidence of aiding and abetting. Where
presence is prima facie not accidental it is evidence, but no more than evidence, for the jury ". With
regard to the act of Wilcox, Lord Goddard said, He must therefore be held to have been present,
taking part, concurring, or encouraging, whichever word you like to use for expressing this conception ".
He laid stress on the fact that at the public entertainment Wilcox made no protest or objection to
the performance by H.
15. I think that that authority covers the conduct of the defendants who were present on the
platform, as it we;e, when Mr. Bradshaw made this speech. They were all members of the St. Kitts
Trades and Labour Union, of which Mr. Bradshaw is the President. The defendant Southwell is
the Vice-President, the defendant France is the General Secretary. France and Liburd had been
the organizers of the bathing party advocated by Mr. Bradshaw; a large party had come in sailing boats
from ,St. Kitts to Nevis. Southwell spoke at the meeting at Stoney Grove Park. There was no protest,
[24 April, 1952.
STHE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE.
no objection, no disagreement with the course of treatment proposed by Mr. Bradshaw in respect of the
plaintiff. It must be be concluded that they concurred and that their presence without protest
-encouraged Mr. Bradshaw and impressed the audience as it has impressed this Court with the
conviction that they supported Mr. Bradshaw.
16. What then was the conspiracy. It was an agreement by all the defendants except
Wallace to urge the people of Nevis to make life so uncomfortable for the plaintiff that he would decide
to leave the island and abandon his business there. The pressure advocated was to enter on his land in
spite of any objection by him and to boo and insult him. The entry on his land was, I take it, to'be a
continuation of what they had already been doing; ttat is, entering it at the spot they chose, and
bathing in the stream at whatever they chose. There was no instigation to use violence or to cause
damage. If these things were done.they were not done as the result of the conspiracy. For this rea-
son, when considering the question of damage, I have left out of account certain matters testified to by
the plaintiff; namely, stones thrown at his house or car, damage to his grounds, or the wrecking of the
17. It was alleged in the statement of claim that a servant engaged by the plaintiff failed to
take up her employment; but it was a mere surmise on the part of the plaintiff that this was due to
the conspiracy; nor were the people of Nevis ever urged by Mr. Bradshaw to take steps of that nature.
The plaintiff has to prove that financial loss occurred as a result of the conspiracy, and I cannot take
into account the unpopularity which he incurred, or the manifestations of it by booing and insulting
him. As will be seen, this had not driven him out of the island or caused him to abandon his business
here; though it has made life unpleasant for him. 1
18. Paragraph 12 of the statement of claim was By reason of the premises the plaintiff's
business has suffered damage." The date of the conspiracy was June 10th, 1951; and nothing can be
considered which occurred before that date. The plaintiff in his examination in chief said "It seriously
affected my scheme of development. Various people I had interested in coming to Nevis. to build win-
ter houses or to engage in agriculture drew back......... The action of the defendants has ruined a
great deal I had done. I suppose the whole damages 20000, my place is no good to me. I built a
bathing pool, good concrete solid for people, they came along at night and wrecked it ". No details
were given as to the pecuniary loss suffered by the plaintiff owing to the conspiracy. His cross-exami-
nation revealed that much of the damage to his business was not due to the conspiracy but to the depreci-
ation of the pound sterling in 1949. He said a dozen plots of lands for residential purposes were sold;
but the purchasers broke their contracts owing to conditions in Nevis. These breaches of contract oc-
curred in 1949, 1950 and early in 1951. As regards some others he said I could'nt tell dates options
Broken in 1951. It was after all these disturbances. It was after July 15th because I did'nt get back
to Bermuda till then" The options he mentioned aris- in this manner. An agent in Bermuda approach-
-ed him and was given an option to sell plots of land in Nevis. The agent secured some verbal promises
.to buy; these promises were broken. The plaintiff infers that they were broken as a result of a conspir-
acy; but it would be a mere conjecture on my part to arrive at that conclusion. I require something
further to satisfy me that persons broke their promises owing to the unpopularity of the plaintiff and
the desire to have him leave the island. Even if I were satisfied as to this, I should require some
evidence as to the approximate loss caused by the various breaches. No such evidence was forthcoming.
There is no suggestion that the hotel lost any business owing to the conspiracy; and the plaintiff has
robustly stated that he is a sticker, that he has abandoned nothing; he will not allow himself to'be
19. The plaintiff is entitled to sympathy for the manner in which he had been treated;
but he has failed to prove that the conspiracy had caused him damage in the sense of financial loss.
For this reason the action of conspiracy fails.
20. Mr. Christian has asked me to give a decision on the issue as to whether a custom existW
in Nevis under which its inhabitants are entitled to enter on the relevant land and bathe in the stream.'
No such custom was pleaded. An attempt was made by witnesses to show that a custom existed, open
to the whole world. This, of course, could not be. All that I wish to say is that in this case no cus-
tom, applicable to the inhabitants of Nevis or of any particular part of Nevis, has been proved.
21. The trespass was of a very aggravated character. It was organised by the St. Kitta
Trades and Labour Union and took the form of the defendants, accompanied by over 100 persons, in-
vading the plaintiff's land as if it were a public park and playing gramophone records with a loud
speaker attached. Not more than two dozen of these persons went for the purpose of bathing in the
stream. The case is one for exemplary damages,, which I fix at one thousond five hundred dollars.
22. There will be an order that the plaintiff recover from the defendants, jointly and
severally, the sum of $1500. As the plaintiff failed on the issue of conspiracy he will recover three-
.fourths only of his taxed costs.
R. J. MANNING,
April 9th, 1952.
24 ABpril, 1952 ]
THE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE.
In the Supreme Court of the Windward Islands and
ERNEST EbTE Appellant
A. J. BOWERY Respondents.
(1951, No. 5-Antigua.)
Before: JACKSON, C.J.
1952-January 8, 9; April 19.
S. T. CHRISTIAN for Appellant
C. A KELSICK, Crown Attorneyfor Respondent.
This is an appeal from conviction and sentence of the appellant by the learned Magistrate,,
District A ", Antigua, on a charge of larceny of some boards, the property of the Antigua Syndicate
The only real ground of appeal is that the conviction is against the weight of evidence.
The charge lays the theft as' between the 18th September and the 2n! October, 1950. On the
7th October the Manager of the Building Department of the Antigua Syndicate Estates Ltd. accom-
panied a Sergeant of Police to Piggott's Village to the house of one John Luke; Luke was asked to
open his storeroom; he did so; in the room were found several pieces of board and scantling; these were
claimed by the Manager as the property of the Syndicate Estates. In accounting for his possession
Luke said that on the 2nd October he was given a job by appellant to transport some lumber. The
Magistrate records his testimony thus: He told me he wanted me to pass around North Street and
pick up some lumber by a joiner shop, East by a fence. I would see a lady, tell her that he sent for the
lumber. I went that same day after work and saw a lady whom I would know by sight and spoke to
her. She told me to look under the house and I would see the things, I could take them. I looked
under the house and took some lumber from there. Some boards and some seantling-some painted
white. I did not count them. I took the said boards to a coconut tree in my yard at Piggott's by the
direction of defendant. He said lie would take them away on the following Tuesday "...... Defendant
did not call for the said lumber on the Tuesday as he had promised. I do not know who moved the
said lumber into my storeroom; Don't know if my two little sons took the lumber into my storeroom".
On being recalled by the Defence and further cross-examined, Luke said, I know Arthur Joseph-
see him in Court now. He took me to Clare Hall that Monday and showed me where to get the lumber
there. It slipped me to say so in examination in chief ". He added in answer to the Court, I met
Arthur Joseph at the same place to which defendant directed me. He and the girl put the lumber in the
cart". Arthur Joseph was previously called for the prosecution; he made no reference to this incident,
except to say in cross-examination that he never gave Luke any orders as to lumber nor did he know
where Luke lived; he related having -seen appellant with some boards one night the month before, but
that he did not know what became of them.
Appellant was at this time a night watchman on premises where the Manager of the building
Department of the Syndicate Estates was carrying out a building contract; Arthur Joseph succeeded
appellant as watchman.
It is upon this evidence defendant was convicted; in effect solely on the evidence of Luke.
Luke's testimony have been so unsatisfactory that it is not easy to understand how it could have been
accepted without support. The learned Magistrate seems to have been misled by a submission that
Luke was an accomplice and that his evidence as such must be corroborated, ior in his reasons he said,
I do not consider Luke an accomplice. The law is not that a person may not be convicted on the
uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice but that the jury should be warned aRi to the possible d.nger.
A. strong prima facie case has been made out against the defendant and in the absence of a defence he
must be convicted." As I see it that is not the main point here; the question is whether the conclusion
arrived at by the Magistrate is unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence;
that I so find. In the words of Lord Hewart, C.J. in Rex v Wallace (1J31) 23 C.A.R. atp. 35,
I have come to the conclusion that the case against the appellant was not proved with that certainty
which is necessary in order to justify a conviction.
The appeal is allowed with costs 3 13s., the conviction quashed and the sentence set aside.
D. E. JACKSON,
Dated this 19th day of April, 1952.
riluteu at "t-e Goveraument P'inLig OLce. Lw i.ia .I.s, ,/ E1.. LACK::s..
Government Printpr.-By Auth?~ity.
[Price 8 cents.J'
[24 April, 19.52.
Aerodromes Ordinance, 1952.
No. of 1952.,
An Ordinance to provide for the management,
control and supervision of aerodromes in the
BE IT ORDAINED by the Governor and
Legislative Council of Antigua as follows:-
1. This Ordinance may be cited as the Short title.
Aerodromes Ordinance, 1952.
2. In this Ordinance, unless the context
"aerodrome" mean any area of land or
water designed, equipped or set apart or
commonly used for affording facilities
for the landing and departure of aircraft;
S"aircraft" shall have the meaning assigned
to it under the Colonial Air Navigation
Imp. S. R. &O.
1949 No. 2000
3. (1) The Governor in Council may make Power to
regulations for the management, control and makereg-
supervision of aerodromes. nation
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of
the powers conferred by the foregoing subsection,
any regulations made under this section may pro-
vide for all or any of the following matters, that is
(a) the placing or removal of erections
adjacent to aerodromes;
No. of 1952.
Aerodromes Ordinance, 1952. No,
(b) declaring any building or part of a
building or any area of land or water at the
aerodrome to be a restricted place or area;
(c) regulating and restricting the admis-
sion of persons whether as passengers or
otherwise to any part of an aerodrome;
(d) regulating and restricting the use of
motor vehicles or seacraft or other objects of
any class or description on any part of an .'
(e) appointing parking places for motor
vehicles at an aerodrome;
(f) the issue of permits and conditions
to be observed by the holders of such permits;
(g) prescribing penalties for the breach
of any regulations made hereunder.
Passed the Legislative Council the day
Clerk of the CouAcil.
OBJECTS AND REASONS.
The object of this Bill is to empower the
Governor in Council to make regulations for the
management, control and supervision of aero-
dromes in the Presidency.
\C. A. KELSICK,
Printed at the Government Printing Office, Leeward Islands,
by E. M. BLACKMAN, Government Printer,-By Authority.
A NTIUA. 2
Prioe 4 cents.