185
4. I venture to think that as the Chairman of the Committee has not acted as Attorney General since 1890, the evidence of Mr. Goodman and, in his absence, of his locum tenens would have been very material to their enquiry especially on the question of the amount and growth of work in this office and that the Committee's report is incomplete without such evidence.
5. Mr. Goodman was appointed in December 1889 and took up his duties on 22nd March, 1890, and I have held the Acting appointment on four occasions,
(1) from 18th February 1889 to 22nd March, 1890.
(2) from 30th May 1891 to 11th March, 1892.
(3) from 13th June, 1892 to January, 1893.
(4) from 18th April, 1894 to the present time.
in all therefore I have held the post about three years. Since Mr. Goodman's appointment, he has actually been in office about two years, whilst during the remainder of the time the office has been held by the present Chief Justice for about six months, and by myself for about two years, and I venture to think that the evidence both of Mr. Goodman and myself was of far greater importance than the information given the Committee by their Chairman.
6. So far as the Chairman's information goes as to the work of the Attorney General under the old system, I venture again to think it is incomplete and apt to mislead any person reading the report without knowing of the facts. It is stated in the report paragraph 116 p.XXIV "He (the Attorney General) had a great deal of Government work, as the Ordinances passed in 1886 amounted to 30 and 1887 to 24";