133
Firstly, I submit that as the regulations with reference to these appointments being Cadet appointments came into force long after I entered the Registry; which I did in September 1897, Such regulations could not affect me as I consider such regulations could only point to the future and not to the past. I had in fact already acquired a vested interest.
Secondly, I submit that when Mr. Kemp was appointed Deputy Registrar and Appraiser in 1904 he had then his preferential claim satisfied, insomuch as he was appointed in preference to Mr. Melbourne, barrister-at-law and a recent addition to the service. In fact Mr. Kemp was already the senior to Mr. Melbourne, having entered the service in November 1898 while Mr. Melbourne only entered the service in May 1900.
Thirdly, I submit that when Mr. Kemp was appointed Deputy Registrar and Appraiser he entered the ranks of professional men, and that he fully realized this position by going Home almost immediately to read for the Bar, to which he is not yet called: that at present he is only a law student, and that it would be unreasonable and unjust to appoint an unqualified man over a more experienced and qualified one in a legal appointment.
Fourthly, I submit that when I entered the service 22 years ago there were very few Cadets in this Colony and up to the present moment the appointment of Registrar has always been held by an old servant of the Government, that therefore the augmentation of the Cadet service was not to upset the existing system but gradually to fill up the gap and caused by retirement or death of the older servants, that the older servants still remaining have the preference to be filled by a barrister-at-law of experience that their qualifications most faithful service entitles them to.
Fifthly, I submit that the appointment of Registrar should be the invariable rience,