CO129-348 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1908 [7-10] — Page 576

572

2

Sul dread da :

sreda väner in evni T

ni quod tot Tot wit vď Tononotemo een god. tia.ch eit

I

to ut kuot

end dark bevisade no (the I

"-t herd in "ynofob end wi

Alt form roarsti ni aint reve dut."nezroll it argit

(i nqmmed) walk & roll eroa yd bergis Jol

svet gebri e ard

4 Jon Dib Does N

•prodynof it bigla

-au bianco Iriteano keðân dab vno endė burcu er «KOARMAST

dro'targ era et notrigo ztens må dom ni di golde

and sees beos

Tok" ishodanov edt naantre et

"ew metra nga ta egnocvbn sit vd due aber med Jomongna ni sosedon oð beiðsmere rotingebisnoo brezNO „problemodne et træet njuta brodea art jut „ë

Been a usadour wilure me elan of bean Jon egen eet

to 384 arid sele nem tarit :ton re duro ebun need ber easO sobrigo all got beton com eetttmoð mið. „Ímammevol adit -foroo a od anno od 3nommavoc ert talzan of rebno nt JI .don to die ehne need bad eano boca a Isider mold 450 evnt 5 lcuin dremeynð ert tut eldalegrtonul al

#

1 renova shihet cà relax® sit to endtimob erit

Sik norið vond ni teans Feng, a due phew. het voldark BeliÐ dra eid bemort qun dand

dom bit veil@ 901,moter:fomos a cð sripes at nolðan an bahey fowl aww dojske mojdssup inen niit esijom .eoldaul Toldo ort of yoedquco to dont grinninoðan

Jug Brobset eit z£ibod ##cobe sou: Lamog nef ovari sud „brosis) foß and act to raise I wit ni bravest erit Jarls benigmi ed zrgin #7 .mmo riucić to WWB by oft Infozemnoo erit to swetv est riolɗw no weto var noišveNY ARED. ANJII n riðir botn Ümmet noed ever die je våtamenco

but apparently there were none to formulate. In fact the

Committee had never taken any interest in the matter,

for they took no notice of the complete cessation of

work in the Court for 3 months in 1907; and although it

was mentioned in my letter of 24th December, they did

not think it worth referring to.

Paragraph 6. It was hardly necessary for the Committee to

assert that they had been solely influenced by what they

believe to be in the interests of the Colony at large,

which might otherwise have been assumed. The assertion

was probably made in order to contrast their attitude

with that of the Chief Justice, the suggestion being

that he had acted entirely in his own interests. Yet a

little reflexion would have shewn the Committee that the

views of the '8 Solicitors' were in great measure based

on the financial aspect of the question, as it affected

themselves.

15. I now turn to the letter of the '8 Solicitors' of 10th

February, on which alone the Committee based themselves,

in forming their opinion.

Paragraph 1. This is a computation of days of holidays

during the year; it is not only inaccurate, in that it

includes Saturdays, on which the Chief Justice has a

great deal to do, but also puerile: as Sundays and Bank Holidays (even assuming that the Chief Justice could get

rid of his work on those days) are not usually brought

into calculation in determining what vacations even a

clerk should have.

Paragraph 2. It is inaccurate to say that prior to 1898

there was no complaint at the absence of Vacations. It was owing to the complaints that the Ordinance was f passed at the instigation of a member of the Par. Paragraph 3. The comparison between the work of the Chier

Justice with a Judge at home is entirely inaccurate.