CO129-380 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1911 [9-10] — Page 219

..

„I sumalo?!

PholasUNA "

215

400

4

Save T.

at babene ad L.

Ivo... IIVI TO 8,0:

a Icand

ING

Om .....

SO 329**

C#

A. Isool and to

TONSCHLfed arokej

$9.79705

BAY 391. OU

IMLA NG

J insoca 2

Add o

*

a

$

Lest III NDALO

A. BOIBGAs bre sai: 20 9337 3

128.* about wng da notjarebi nou

to two al trasnsavob troni

4.

This state of affairs must necessarily create grave

dissatisfaction in the minds of our Clients and of the

public in this Colony, with the method in which, what are

considered to be just claims, or reasonable and equitable

views, are dealt with when referred to you and can only drive

them to the conclusion that the attitude of the local Govern-

ment, which is often so seriously taken exception to in the

many cases in which its interests are brought in contact with

the interests of private individuals in this Colony, will

be ratified by your Office as a matter of course. The

arrival at this conclusion is enhanced in the present case

owing to the fact that, out of many reasonable requests,

one the appointment of Assessors to sit with the Judge

had been originally proposed in the same connection by the

local Government itself, and was obviously the only proper

and adequate method of constituting the tribunal in view.

It may be that the local Government are afraid, owing to

past experience, to entrust their views as to compensation

to the arbitrament of independent and outside experts. If

so, we should hardly have thought it possible such a view

would have commended itself to the occupant of your high

and Imperial Office.

5. Our Clients inevitably feel that their case has not been

considered by you upon its merits independently of the views

of the local Government, as they expected it to be, and as,

conceivably, they were entitled to expect it should have

been; and that your decision has been swayed by the views of

the local Government on grounds which are not apparent to

our Clients, which are or may be mistaken or inequitable,

which our Clients might be able, given the opportunity, to

shew good cause against if not entirely to refute.

We would point out that our Clients did not demand their

-2-