made without his consent & in
to lear him.
prandulently
At
only
the Tusiness
order
& that Howell retained
interest after the alleged sale. Howell maintained that me
sold because he was
such
as a
a course could not be regarded
·punishment
t a is
undoubtedly
extravagant seeing that Howell is
good cinl servant.
loving mone puthe
a
& because that he retained no
interest.
if
ay
The thief Justice stated that
it could be proved that Howell retained interest in the business after 1897 the charge of fraud muust he held proved but in spite of may suspicions circumstances, he did not think that (the custeme of
q
wo
a alevitraterest after o proved ( See also his menite in Enclos2)
The conduct of
Howell is
mysterious, but I do not think in
new
we
that
a
ๆ
Jeuch hanging
vey
Sir F. Pigott's judgment that verten the matter. It is undesirable
ivil servant should come out
a case with the cloud of doubt
mer
him, but where the facts
are not strony suigh twawant drimisal
short of that, the reandal must remain.
the Attorne you As for the suggestion I that he should to be retired on a
a full pension
123
On the whole however, the
kemel of
the matter is that in
spite I an inspection of
Howells
bank look
мо
the Chief J. would find
proof of his hav;
had
97
financial connection with the H. K. Butthey since
we should
think
Zach.
&
189).
I
therefore
that the 5 Sis
51
not disposed to purane the matter
of
further.
hur Tudor
may'
The love
kau
your
Row 14/6.
views?
- very badly reported to
find great difficulty in
following it:
but I do not find anything to indicate
that Hource stains an intercat in
I that is so
tu business
와
wn shid do nothing.
W.
ฐ
may adil,
dos y cam
norting of Six 7. Piggott, that
am
I & afser
that
probably koer
statement made
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.