The Argus at KellyGang 22/2/1882 (2)
" Jan 4, 1882 . "T R Wilson, Esq., Under Secretary.
" Sir, – I have the honour herewith to forward for the approval of the hon. the Chief Secretary a compilation of the evidence in the case of Mr Nicolson, assistant commissioner of police, in accordance with instructions. It may, perhaps, save time by subjoining the mode of treating the subject which has been adopted and which may be given synoptically as follows :- First – Introduction defining the simple issue which the Minister is called on to decide. Second – Clause 8 of report set out dealing with Mr Nicolson. Third – The clause analysed. Fourth – Captain Standish's charges against Mr Nicolson, the evidence rebutting same, with the commission's opinion upon each where expressed. Fifth – Superintendent Hare's charges against Mr Nicolson similarly treated. Sixth – Conclusion respecting the grounds upon which the recommendation was made. Will you kindly ascertain whether this plan of collating the evidence meets with the sanction of the Chief Secretary prior to having it copied ?
J .WILLIAMS. Minute by Chief Secretary.
"Approved. "J M G"
" January 17, 1882 .
"T R Wilson Esq., Under Secretary.
"Sir, – I have the honour herewith to forward a compilation of the evidence in the cases dealt with by the Police Commission. I have endeavoured faithfully and without bias to give effect to your instructions, the object aimed at being to present the reasons which weighed with the commission in arriving at their conclusions on the one hand, and the contrary views entertained by the officers on the other. The compilation, consequently, in some parts, assumes the form of summing up of the evidence, which is unavoidable. A complete index to the evidence of the officers has been attached to the documents in their respective cases, so that the hon. the Minister can readily refer to any point or question about which he may be in doubt.
The references in Mr Sadlier's rejoinder have been found of so exhaustive a nature that direct recourse to the volume of evidence has been deemed preferable to the system of collation adopted in other cases – I have, &c. ,
" J. WILLIAMS."
In undertaking the work I had no object to serve except to facilitate and expedite the action of the Government. I received no remuneration for the work. So far as the officers were concerned, I had no feeling whatever to gratify, and as regards the commission their honour lay in the hands of the chairman, who carefully perused what was written. The compilation in each case necessarily depended upon the line of argument supplied by each officer. For instance, Mr Nicolson appeared to have accepted in globo the conclusions of the commission, except as regards his retirement from the force. Mr Hare answered seriatim each section of the reply to Mr Dixon's protest. Sadlier entered into an elaborate defence of his conduct throughout the pursuit. Sergeant Steele pointed out that he had acted strictly in accordance with discipline and the rules of the service.
The subordinates, who also challenged the findings of the commission, either denied the accusations or pleaded extenuating circumstances. An epitome of the several cases was attached to the compilation. In this, which showed the spirit in which the compilation was made, it was pointed out that the case put forward by the commission in regard to Mr Nicolson and Superindent Hare appeared to resolve itself into the proposition, viz., "Was it expedient, and in view of the absolute necessities of the public service, that both of those officers should be obliged involuntarily to retire from the Police force ?" The aspect in which it was thought the questions at issue should be considered was essentially prospective. In Mr Sadlier's case it was submitted that issue raised was whether certain alleged errors in judgment warranted the disrating and implied censure contained in the 6th clause of the report, and so on with the others.
The writer "JP" states that I boasted in public that I could have made it hotter for the officers. This I deny. I may amongst the members of the Yorick have defended the action of the commission ; but a man's expression of opinions in a private club should not be viewed with significance. Possibly I may have said that the commission could have dealt more severely in some cases ; but I assure the commission that I am not chargeable with such execrable taste as to boast about anything I could have done. Again, the writer would have the casual reader suppose that the report was my work. To show how unfounded is this statement, I produce the original manuscript of the resolutions written by the members of the commission, and signed by the chairman. Even for the historical sketch I am only mechanically responsible. I submit in support of this the various, and as they might be called the seminal, stages through which the sketch passed before it was adopted. In the first place I prepared a synoptical outline of the salient features of a narrative covering the entire history of the pursuit, with exhaustive references to the evidence. Copies of those printed outlines were furnished to each member, so that discussion and reference would be thereby facilitated. Expressions of opinion were elicited upon the several points, and it this manner the lines of the sketch were laid down. The consideration of the lines and of the sketch itself occupied several meetings. The written narrative was amended in many important particulars by the commission, and was not till then finally ordered to be printed.
| ! | 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. |
