38.
but two of the Justices holding their official Appointments, upon being asked to attend at the hearing of the very cases named in the Memorandum, declined plea of pressing business included in the Commission.
His Excellency is requested to state in the Memorandum that certain of the Justices on the 23th of May, concurred with the retiring Chief Magistrate "by which, in the judgment of His Excellency, the obvious intent and meaning of the Law were abrogated and annulled by the action of the Bench" that again, on the 2nd of June, certain of the Justices "Supported the retiring Chief Magistrate in his determination not to give effect to the Law," and "cooperated with him in his extraordinary course of proceeding":
Those statements not question that plea, but we submit that the conduct of the Official Justices, in this particular, contrasts favourably with that of their official brethren. & if be suggested to these remarks that the nature of their offices prevents the officials from attending at Sessions we should be glad to be informed for what purpose, different from the others, they were included in a decision.