Royal Commission report day 14 page 1
The Royal Commission evidence for 3/5/1881
(see also introduction to day 14)
Superintendent John Sadleir evidence
Present:
Hon. F. LONGMORE, M.L.A., in the Chair;
W. Anderson Esq., M.L.A., J. H. Graves, Esq., M.L.A.,
E. J. Dixon , Esq., J.P., J. Gibb, Esq., M.L.A.,
G. R. Fincham, Esq., M.L.A., G. W. Hall, Esq., M.L.A.
3005 Have you anything further to say?— Only this, that since the last meeting I sent in a return of the number of reported appearances of the outlaws at various places (Appendix 5), and that I desire to be present to offer to the Commission any remarks upon that that they may desire. The information as to the steps taken by the police will necessarily be incomplete, as I have explained in the foot-note to the report, and it may be that the explanations I have given may be questioned by the other officers who were in charge of operations; and as it is such a very important report, I thought it better to be here to offer myself for any examination by the Commission or the officers concerned on the subject. 3006 There was one case where I think it was stated in the papers that the Kelly party were seen near one of the Hart family, where they bound the man not to give any information for a month. Is that in your list?— Yes, I think so. That would be about October 1879. It is the sixth item on page 3—Green's paddock, near Wangaratta. I would remark that the genuine names of parties are given in this list in many instances, and urge upon the press the necessity of precaution, either in alluding to the names or the particular facts that would lead to the discovery of the identity of our informants. In this instance it does not much matter, because the man made the affair public himself in Wangaratta.
3007 What do you mean by the entry, October 23rd— “A man named Smith reported he had been made prisoner by the gang. (See last item for steps taken.)” What were the steps taken?— You will see in the previous report, October the 16th, that we had an agent employed as scout in that very locality.
3008 Then the police took no action, except through this agent, on that report?— No. You see this information was more than a month old.
3009 Was the statement made in the papers of the day that they had given money for the silence of Smith?— Certainly, and Smith stated it too.
3010 Was the money handed over to the police?— I think it was offered to the police.
3011 How much?— £10. I am speaking from memory. Two sums of £5 each.
3012 Who was the officer he offered it too?— I cannot tell that. The files of correspondence all speak for themselves.
3013 The report is true that Smith did receive £10, and did do what I have referred to?— It is true he reported to that effect.
3014 And at the end of the time he offered the money to the police, and gave information?— I believe so.
3015 The first information came from Smith?— No, the first information we got did not come from Smith, himself. We got hold of rumours from the police after Smith had started it.
3016 Where are the references— “D 10,” and so on?— The number is attached to the files I forwarded to Mr. Williams, the secretary of the Commission.
3017 Have you reported in any of your papers, in connexion with this, about the money (the £10) that Smith was offered—will it be found in the report?— I cannot say without looking at the papers.
3018 Can you say whether Smith retained the money or not?— I believe he did retain the money. I believe that is certain.
3019 Do you know what bank the notes he had were from?— No; Mr. Nicolson knows more about that. I did not see Smith at all.
The witness withdrew.
Mr. Nicolson . —I received that report yesterday, and I am going over it, and will have to add considerably to it in many respects.....
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 RC_index.html
