The Secretary, Department of External Affairs, has forwarded the following memorandum for advice:

A man named A. appeared before the Central Court of Papua on a charge of attempt to murder and was acquitted on the ground of insanity. The Judge therefore ordered that he be detained in strict custody in the Port Moresby gaol until His Majesty's pleasure be known.

1. It appears from the evidence that A. is usually quite sane but is liable to attacks of mania, induced to a certain extent by indulgence in alcohol.
2. As there is no provision in the Territory for the reception and care of lunatics, the practice has hitherto been to hand them over to the Queensland Government for detention and maintenance in an asylum at the expense of Papua, but a difficulty arises in this case by the fact that A. is said to be, for the greater part of the time, to all intents and purposes, sane (though it would be impossible to release him), and the Queensland doctors might therefore be unable to sign the necessary certificate.
3. The Premier of Queensland was asked whether the judgment of the Central Court would be accepted in Queensland as sufficient evidence that A. is insane and should be detained as a lunatic.
4. The Queensland Crown Solicitor answered the question in the negative and added:

The Commonwealth Authorities might be asked whether they consider that the provisions of the Colonial Prisoners Removal Act 1884 (47 & 48 Vic. c.31) are applicable in this case, and be referred to the definition of 'Criminal lunatic' in Section 18 of that Act.

5. I shall be glad to be favoured with your advice in the matter.

In my opinion A. is a criminal lunatic within the meaning of section 18 of the Colonial Prisoners Removal Act 1884.

The question whether the Act is applicable to his case depends on whether Queensland and Papua are British possessions within the meaning of the Act.

After a careful consideration of the Act I have come to the conclusion that for the purposes of this Act Queensland and Papua are separate British possessions. See McKelvey v. Meagher 4 C.L.R. 265 at p.278.

In my opinion, the Colonial Prisoners Removal Act 1884 is applicable to the case of the prisoner A.

[Vol. 13, p. 289]