Royal Commission report day 18 page 18
The Royal Commission evidence for 11/5/1881
(see also introduction to day 18)
'Constable Alfred John Faulkiner' giving evidence
5740 Was not Captain Standish there to give you instructions?— He was there, but he did not give any.
5741 Did you require any instructions on the hill side?— I thought we might have been informed of the information we were going on.
5742 Is it an easy thing to inform thirty or forty police in the bush?— I should think it was a thing that ought to be done (not wishing to be impertinent) whether it was easy or not.
5743 By the Commission. —You would not see any difficulty in informing forty or fifty men?— No.
5744 In conversation with Mr. Hare, and in connection with the Kellys, when you came down for final instructions to go back to that place, did Mr. Hare tell you anything about the probability of the Kellys attacking the police in armour?— No.
5745 Did you know amongst the police that it was known amongst the officers of the force that the Kellys would likely meet the police in armour?— No.
5746 If it was known to the police officers that the Kellys were going to meet the constables in armour, as a matter of opinion, would you consider that it would be desirable, in order that you should know how to act in the matter, that you should be informed of it?— Yes, I should.
5747 Supposing that you had the knowledge now that the men were in armour and going to attack them, would that deter you from doing your duty?— It would make me more careful, still I would endeavor to arrest them.
5748 If you were informed that the four men were going to meet you in armour would you approach them and endeavor to capture them in a different way from what you would if they were on equal terms with you?— Yes.
5749 Would you attempt to rush them?— No.
5750 How would you act?— I would have an idea to fire low, or something of that kind, to hit them in the logs.
5751 Did you ever hear it said?— No, never a word.
5752 By Mr. Sadleir— Do you know what officers were aware that the Kellys were likely to be in armour?— I do not.
5753 You have heard a great deal since from later information. Have you any notion what officers knew?— No further except I saw about the letters of the “diseased stock,” received by Mr. Nicolson.
5754 Are you not aware that I knew equally well with Mr. Nicolson?— No.
5755 And Mr. Hare knew?— No.
5756 You say it was about the 9th November that Mr. Smith found the police horses?— Yes.
5757 You said the Kellys dropped the horses because they were pushed?— That is what I believe.
5758 Did you see the horses after they were found?— No.
5759 Then you cannot tell that it was that the horses were completely done, or that the Kellys were pushed by the police?— No.
5760 What police were there there to push them?— Johnson and his party and Inspector Brook
5761 Would you be surprised to find, from Inspector Smith's statement at the time, and Mr. Nicolson's evidence since, that the marks on those horses were over a week old, from the time they were let loose till they were found?— I would not be a bit surprised at that.
5762 By the Commission. —Could anyone tell?— They might imagine.
5763 By Mr. Sadleir. —Cannot you tell by whether the marks are wearing out whether those are marks of yesterday or several days ago?— Yes.
5764 By the Commission. —If there were sweat marks?— Yes.
5765 If I ride a horse to-day, and turn him out to-morrow, can you tell whether I rode it the day before by sweat marks?— No.
5766 By Mr. Sadleir. —That is not the question at all. If you see a horse that has been turned out from under the saddle, can you not say by seeing him next day that it is very recent?— Yes; I could , form an opinion.
5767 By the Commission. —Could a party not rest a day, or two days, and leave a horse behind?— Yes, they could.
Mr. Sadleir . —My purpose is only to show those men were not pushed.
By the Commission . —In your opinion.....
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. |
The previous day / next day . . . Royal Commission index
