46
F
It is impossible to misunderstand your first explanation, beyond the fact that the threat of legal proceedings did issue (and very properly in terms of the Attorney General's draft notice) from your Department - a point that was not questioned; there is no reason to doubt, as you do doubt, Mr. Pauncefote's statement that the money was offered at the Treasury on the 3rd Instant, and in terms of the notice over your signature there was no necessity for offering it before. These terms, however, I am to observe, are in direct contradiction to the remark in the Government notification of 1st July last, published in the Gazette for 3 weeks during the month of August; again, when called on for explanation you stated that you had no doubt that the occupant of Lot No. 1415 was and is included in the List submitted on the 3rd Instant to the Court; the matter was really irrelevant, but if you conceived it necessary to introduce it, it was your duty to have ascertained the fact so as to place it beyond doubt not only of yourself, but of the office by which the explanation was required, as this might have been done in five minutes from the documents in your office.
So much for your first explanatory paragraph.
In your next (the Police and Lighting Rate office) you mention an office that does not exist, as the Rates in question are now payable under the Ordinance at the Colonial Treasury.
From your third explanation the only inference is that you signed a blank notice and omitted to exercise the most ordinary supervision over the subordinate to whom you entrusted the delicate duty of filling up a document, important from its being one of a series, called for by...
46
F
It is impossible to miverstand your first explanation, beyond the fact that the threat of legal proceedings did issue (and very properly in terms of the Attorney General's draft notice) from your Departint
a point that was not questioned; there is
no senson
to doubt,
as
we you
do doubt
M. Panincefote's statement that the
mas
money
offered at the Treasury in the 3rd
Instant, and in terms of the notice over
your
on
signature there was no
J
for offering
necessity
it before. these terms however,
I am to observe, are in direct contradiction
remark in the
of the lovernment notification of 1st July last, published as Gazette for 3 weeks
you
during
the month
of August; again, when called on for
explanation you stated that
the
you
should not have
had
no doubt that
occupant of Lot No1415 mas and
is mcluded in the List submitted on the jet Instant to the bout; the matter
mas
A
1
mas
it
really irrelevant, but if you conceived
to introduce it, it was
necessary duty to have ascertained the fact
your
so as to
place it beyond the doubt not only of
yourself, but of the office by which the
you
explanation was required, as this might have done in five minutes from
office..
the documents in
your
on
So much for your first explanatory
paragraph.-
In
your
next
(the Police and
you
mention an
office
Lighting Rate office) that does not exist, as the Rates in question are
now payable mider the ordinance at the Colonial Treasury. -
From
you
third explanation the only
inference is that
you signed a blank
notice and omitted to excercise the most
ordinary expervision of your
to whom
you
Subordinate
entruated the delicate
-
duty of filling up a document, important from its being one of a
a series, called for
by,
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.