Royal Commission report day 48 page 13

From KellyGang
Jump to: navigation, search

previous page / next page

The Royal Commission evidence for 1/9/1881

(full text transcription)

(see also introduction to day 48)

'Sup Francis Augustus Hare giving evidence'

16486 Do you know any other officer who did?— I think Mr. Langley did.

16487 By the Commission— Are you receiving £100 a year extra over what you received formerly?— No, £25 a year more than in 1870, the time of the Power capture.

16488 Have you received no other allowance?— For one year and a half Mr. Ramsay gave me and Mr. Winch a £100 a year for being in charge of the two most responsible districts in the colony, and when Mr. Berry came into office he knocked off my £100 but not Mr. Winch's.

16489 By Mr. Nicolson — Is it usual to get a year's leave on full pay?— Mr. Langley had it.

16490 In your application for a year's leave on full pay, did you mention the capture of Power?— I daresay I might have done; I may have done. Mind you, this is five or six years ago. In all probability I did mention that promises had been made to me.

16491 By the Commission— You did not receive an extra £100 a year while you were away?— No, Mr. Chomley it—He was in charge of the Depot.

16492 By Mr. Nicolson— Why do you say in your evidence that you deserved success in pursuit of the Kellys, when, according to your own accounts, your search parties all ended in failure, and showed your system was wrong?— I did not say my system was wrong.

16493 Your parties ended in failure?— So did yours.

16494 But I did not give it up—you did?— I was obliged to. You did on the first occasion give it up because you had failed in it, and then I gave it up afterwards because I was ill. I said I worked hard and deserved success.

16495 In your evidence then you spoke of catching a horse and saddling it yourself—are you not aware that other officers did that?— No.

16496 Are you not aware that Mr. Sadleir did that?— No.

16497 By the Commission— If other officers say they did it, you do not deny it?— No.

16498 Did you intend to imply that you did work that other officers did not?— No, only that I was accustomed to work, and used to pack the horses myself.

16499 By Mr. Nicolson— You spoke of the manner in which the search parties were conducted, and the way they were spread out in the bush—were they not managed in a similar mode before you came there?— I suppose so. I only gave information to the Commission as to how the parties worked.

16500 By the Commission— Did you reflect on other officers when you said that you did these things?— No, I did not.

16501 By Mr. Nicolson— I wished to remove the impression on that occasion that other officers did not take the same trouble and care?— I did not reflect on the others.

16502 Did you not exhaust the mode of capture which you adopted up to the time you left?— I do not think it.

16503 By the Commission— The question on that is, had you at any time a reasonable prospect of catching the Kellys that you were aware of it?— Yes.

16504 What was the prospect?— That on the Warby Ranges; and on the second occasion Mr Sadleir said he had received information that I was very close on them.

16505 Were you aware at any time that you were close on them?— I believed I was at that time in the Warby Ranges .

16506 By Mr. Nicolson— Can you give the Commission one instance where the information on which you went out proved to be correct—one solitary instance?— No, I cannot; I never caught the Kellys.

16507 You remember about the tent in the, Warby Ranges ?— Yes.

16508 Belonging to the outlaws?— No; the tent shown to the men on the spring.

16509 Did not you mean to infer that that was a tent belonging to the outlaws?— The squatter thought it was, and took me up to it.

16510 Are you satisfied it was not?— No; because I knew those bee men used to supply horse-feed and provisions to those men. There was horse-feed in the tent, and I believe the outlaws could have got it.....

Previous page / Next page

 ! The text has been retyped from a microfiche copy of the original.

We have taken care to reproduce this document but areas of the original text may been damaged.

We also apologise for any typographical errors.

The previous day / next day . . . Royal Commission index RC_index.html