2.
Chann
legal
On the 29th May I was retained by the
man in
adviser
th
Capacity, as I imagined, of
of the Commission - Arcumstances
howvena somnamvisões me that in this I was
Mistaken.
If the 38t! a Consultation book place betincend the Chairman two other members of
the Commission
Myself at the Course,
d
to be purana there after. I have perand
the evidence to then at the
and at once suggested.
6 first the Meetings
that much of that which
had been taken shumed to expunged from the Minutes and that in future the Commission shoves adhere
rigialy
to the rules
Courts of Law and
of evidence as laid down
Gadmit all
by
hearsay
refuse irrelevant matter. This was assentia
Evidence or to and actin on
for a time, when the Attorney
Seneral protective against the manner in which
the preusings
having
a discussion
Conductio.
arison wo
shortly after this
to the relevancy off
of certain Evideme tenduen by Mr May the Council Chamber having beer alcana
3502
May and
for
that purpose I urged mot shingly that it shines and was from dad on my opinion to detail to the forvending
be rejected
Commission the reasons which
made that course ne
Necessary,
when I was chicken
Buy one of the Commissioners and
part of my daly
mo
infones that
and that I han
neither price now vole in the matter - This statement.
not
bung objichia to but as it appeared to me
to with assentia
And
t-on the part of the Chairman
remaining Commissimies I then became aware that I han mistakin
My ben retained onl
an Examiner,
position
only
tenew on me
fastenin
Art
haw
a name
by the Attorney General
and
firsk
which
has sinu bun adopted by the Commission in their report . I continued however to remonstrate from
time to time
- ainst the mode in which the
against
which the forending
effect.
and
were conducted, not allogether without this at
length brought forth the protat of
the Attorney General which I presume the
atia &
t. His Excellency.
Commissimas
have
uportia
On the Conclusion of the 1r Branch
of the Enguing
a Ansultation was
354
heewat
My