I a
not me
framment place in his report. Into the Gambling questionct is
in Snigh
necessay
to enter.
dismissed for being implicated
مریکا
money
lending transactions; and there is at my
rate nothing
Ambia
here.
? Reply that U. I was on that ground; and that ll. S.
dismissed
regrets be
CELE
no reason
for
а
recnsideration of his previous decision
A.F-19/5
we have already decline to
reconsider the previous decision,
Рали из магз ст
and although
dani Wither fiugh, I am afraid there
is nothing here that affords
hulox
leill
their care
Cer deacce
Lod felbome
Two charges
281
you please adire un
It is another one 2
S 1219
are made against letter Singh. Who the first change he was found guilty & dismissed. He was also in the opinion of the officials of the Colony guilty of the offence organ o this fact was submitted
the first
in the second change
to us the in view of his affert chage. The first chape
noa monly
on
that racting
leader contrants Regulation contained in Gost & stification 405/94, (see Enclo 2 in 23203/97) The second chase. bribes from
the
respacing Theregne
that of taking
in Wa Lane!
Gambling
House
sufficent ground for
the case,
1
proposce.
Lord Selborne
ок стопове
79
Will you please deal with this. The criter called twice on me d seems very confident of his client's case, but I have not gone
Papers
C.PL 12 Sept
into the
-865-2000-12-97 646-4----3000-6-98
Asto (1) relating to the minglending, the evidence showed that litter singh paid to the Courwer
the
money which he alleger now was batbya third party by name Grada Singh. It is also clear that letter Singh acted throughout (if he was most the actual lender) as the go between between the debtor the creditor & that the cannterest was paid by the debtor to him. Utter Singh admitted the hurth
that the debtor stated in his geverything evidence. Think that there was
evidence on which it comes be found that letter Singh has flooken the regulation that this was miscondus In which he could be dismissed. The sentence was no don't severe, but we have afferred it o
no new
lead in
facto
are
now adduced which should to reconsider the decision.