The Secretary to the Postmaster-General's Department has requested advice as to whether the receipt given by the Censor in each case for registered postal articles delivered to him by the Postmaster-General's Department, in pursuance of the Governor-General's proclamation of 26 September 1914, is a sufficient acquittance for the Department, as against the addressees for non-delivery of the articles.

Article VIII of the Universal Postal Convention of 26 May 1906 provides for the payment, in the case of the loss of a registered postal article, except from causes beyond control, of an indemnity to the sender of the article, or, at the request of the sender, to the addressee.

I do not, however, think that the articles which have been delivered to the Censorship in pursuance of the Governor-General's order of 24 September 1914 would be deemed to have been lost within the meaning of Article VIII of the Convention. There appears to be no other provision in the Convention or the Regulations for its execution imposing any liability on the Department for non-delivery of a registered postal article.

Regulation 96 of the Post and Telegraph Regulations relates to the delivery of registered postal articles but does not appear to give the sender or addressee any remedy in the event of non-delivery.

Neither the Post and Telegraph Act 1901-1916 nor the Regulations appear to impose any liability on the Postmaster-General's Department for failure to deliver a registered postal article and section 158 of the Act expressly provides that an action or other proceeding shall not be maintainable against the King or the Postmaster-General or any officer of the Department by reason of any default delay error omission or loss whether negligent or otherwise in the transmission or delivery or otherwise in relation to a postal article posted or received or omitted to be posted or received under the Act.

In my opinion, by virtue of section 158 of the Act, no action lies against the Postmaster-General's Department for non-delivery of the registered postal articles retained by the Censor, and it is, I think, unnecessary in this connection, to determine the effect, if any, of the receipts given by the Censor.

[Vol. 18,p p. 304]