BORI HINT .KJEI groothoff
-Looxil to¥ oghafi oufas o' voпorí quiz ova. I
.faltusbi
Mosaqn-h a to goo & salgotnom Apart 1:1201 36 49328I &'yorsf-
Broarjan oft?w bauuengze 7 minigo out of oviraime Loward hrot mort
hehurlani al dotsqash dand n .dunon Isaigh wont, boaogene østà or
no atus 1.00 ontorka nntxistros en interos art ront 1922al &
yameffaux way arroted award brtet adhe
noldne ve
1
howoffa I get of etcovs op oncile to ooito od .-100 of redt
eaths of entouftrk of retive art or unottoelɗo Tenderou ver
11 I JA ocene 03 bro oil surt mat I. of branet fiktw evere
ot adettent eon nth I (sotvbe sidequomodelh naivin to eIdaqsoni
I omis see a'r de joaa bi os nokznetdo IscopreⱭ %* 8297cXO
Яtow com blwon si notabɖo
at www another var zum berukog
fath end højslenim vara!Jeuzli to no dud protostalena
-NZTA GIɗansblanos batoreb I
doelte ogal vao od ootzalhD
betotto I bas
t
bedtomb vfzoetreqd art at hamoen *1 11% of molz-
.oqeria toetreq stom crni i saltzug må svengo-oo of
.3
delt badteres ad ot davr eu of armor I
of hazeler en rok new row how sterton els reiterly noite up odd
na. Itorno air tarit Tet oa oy of bevolls new i stoted am bermo
informed that it was an accomplished fact. The Chief Justice
is the only person sufficiently familiar with the work of the
Court who could express an opinion on the subject. Had I been
136
consulted I should have given the same advice as I afterwards
gave, and subsequent events have shown that the opinion I formed
was accurate.
3.
I must also point out that no absence of
cordiality or good will on my part could possibly affect the
working of the scheme, as Sir E. Grey supposes. Appeals would
be set down and would come on for hearing; and if, owing to the
Judge of Shanghai having to return to Shanghai, some appeals
could not be heard, they would remain over till the next appeal
session. In so far as my assistance could facilitate matters,
it would have been given loyally; but the scheme was so inherent-
ly defective, that nothing but unnecessary delays, prejudicial
to suitors, could have resulted from it.
4.
If the scheme had been passed, the first
session would have been held about this period. I therefore
append the following information for the Secretary of State of
the work of the Full Court since May.
(1). An appeal of the Hip On Company lasted 5 days:
May 3rd., 4th., 5th., 6th. and 17th.
(11). A case in original jurisdiction in which the
Government was interested, taken by agreement
before the Full Court, lasted 3 full days, and
3