Royal Commission report day 18 page 19
The Royal Commission evidence for 11/5/1881
(see also introduction to day 18)
'Constable Alfred John Faulkiner' giving evidence
5768 By Mr. Sadleir. —To show the fact. You could tell the difference between the marks a day old and a week old?— Yes, but not after rain.
5769 Suppose there was no rain?— I would be able to make out.
5770 Pretty well?— Yes.
5771 On the 3rd November you say there was information about the Kellys crossing?— Yes.
5772 You never saw the original report?— No.
5773 Have you any idea whether the Kellys were said to have crossed, or some men supposed to be the Kellys?— Said to be the Kellys?
5774 Are you not aware that Inspector Brook Smith reported fully in the matter?— No.
5775 Your first letter to Mr. Hare was in June 1880. You reported that some person told you that the Kellys had been seen coming on the Fifteen-mile Creek, and living on a Chinaman at a certain place—where is that certain place?— I do not think I reported that.
By the Commission . —The letter states what did occur.
5776 By Mr. Sadleir. —Or information to that effect?— Not living with a Chinaman, getting provisions from a Chinese store.
5777 You have mentioned in that letter that they got those provisions from Chinamen, at a certain place; did you mention the place to Mr. Hare?— No, I did not.
5778 What was the good of that information to Mr. Hare, then?— Because we had not at that time seen it. We had only been informed they had been getting provisions, and intended, when we could, to see if the information was correct.
5779 This was on the 16th, and your next letter the 22nd?— Yes.
5780 Was this very valuable information lying idle all this time?— We called on the Chinaman. He was not there, and we could not wait.
5781 What was the value of that information, I ask you, as a sensible man—that they were getting provisions from a Chinaman at a certain place; what officer could make any use of that?— They could make no use of it as I furnished it, till I got further particulars.
5782 Did you furnish it on the 22nd, “The best thing that we can do is to return” —could got no information—is there any fresh information there?— Yes.
5783 Then your third letter of the 23rd June is to this effect—a party of armed men being seen in the neighborhood of Rutherglen?— Yes.
5784 Is not your third letter entirely about that, and nothing else?— Yes.
5785 So that this valuable information you never thought any more about?— No.
The Commission . Mr. Hare verbally.
Mr. Hare . —Mr. Sadleir was not in the room when he gave me full particulars about it.
5786 By Mr. Sadleir.-—When did you come back to see your officer?— On the 25th.
5787 That was nine days afterwards?— Yes.
5788 You reported first on the 16th, that you had this valuable information about the Chinaman, and the first time you mentioned the cave to Mr. Hare was the 25th. You did delay explaining fully to Mr. Hare about it till then?— Yes, I did.
5789 That was very valuable information?— Yes.
5790 What was the value of it?— That they were getting provisions from a Chinese store. This information we received on the 15th or 16th, but our reasons for not being able to give the full particulars were that we called, and the Chinaman was not at home.
5791 It might have been valuable, but it was not because you had not full information at the time?— It was not full.
5792 Then it was not valuable?— It was, but we could not follow it up.
5793 By the Commission. —Was it of value to let Mr. Hare know where the Kellys were?— We had first to see the Chinaman, before we could in form Mr. Hare, and he was not there, and would not be home till about the end of the week.
5794 By Mr. Sadleir. —What was the “certain place”?— Either the Buckland Flat or Gap.
5795 By the Commission. —Did you ever go to to the place you heard they were being supplied at?— No.....
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
