Royal Commission report day 48 page 6
The Royal Commission evidence for 1/9/1881
(see also introduction to day 48)
'Sup Francis Augustus Hare giving evidence'
16344 Well, it is a very serious charge?— Well, I stated facts.
16345 Was it in any way interfering with your usefulness?— The telegram to Mullane was, most certainly. And I think also that Mr. Nicolson might have given me a lot of information and his ideas of the matter that Mr. Sadleir might have differed with him in, and which he did not give me. As far as the armour was concerned, Mr. Sadleir said he did not believe in it. He said Mr. Nicolson was the only one that did believe in it.
16346 Then, the information Mr. Nicolson had about the armour was doubted by the man nest to him?— Yes.
16347 It was simply a report that one believed in and the other did not?— Yes; but one had facts, and the other had not. Mr. Nicolson had the facts as to the mould-boards being stolen. He knew—I heard afterwards—that some iron was first beaten up and tried. The “diseased stock” man said that, and upon that they tried the mould-boards. Mr. Nicolson knew about that, and I knew nothing about that till I saw this “Diseased Stock” agent.
16348 Do you remember seeing that in the papers. Was that before or after you saw the “stock” man?— I fancy it was in the papers before that the mould-boards had been stolen.
16349 Was not that information in the possession of Mr. Sadleir as well as Mr. Nicolson?— I suppose it was, but I never heard it till I saw the “Diseased Stock” man.
16350 Do you remember, on reflection, that the matter was ever discussed between you and Mr. Sadleir before you saw him?— No. I cannot remember, but I know it was discussed in the presence of Mr. Sadleir , and the “diseased stock” man was present.
16351 You do not remember hearing Mr. Sadleir express his dissatisfaction at Mr. Nicolson keeping back information from him?— No, quite the reverse. He said at first Mr. Nicolson did, but then he ( Mr. Sadleir ) put up his back, and then Mr. Nicolson told everything.
16352 You never found Mr. Sadleir keep back anything?— No; he always consulted in the most friendly manner, and co-operated entirely.
16353 Did he not do that with Mr. Nicolson?— He told me, when Mr. Nicolson first came back, he found that he was withholding information from him; but he came to a stand with him, and from that time he gave all the information in his power.
16354 The inference you draw from that is that there was a temporary estrangement between the two?— Not estrangement. Mr. Nicolson is a very secret man. We have all very different temperaments. I am just the reverse.
16355 With the exception of this-short interval for explanation between Mr. Nicolson and Mr. Sadleir, there was no misunderstanding between them?— I do not think so at all.
16356 Did that, in your estimation, amount to a misunderstanding?— No.
16357 Then the chances are that Mr. Sadleir, who was colleague of Mr. Nicolson at that time, was working in perfect co-operation with him as his superior officer?— I fancy so.
16358 Then the chances are he would be in possession of the most important particulars of any evidence that was of value to the police force as well as Mr. Nicolson?— Yes.
16359 Then, in that case, the time that Mr. Nicolson had it in his discretion to communicate those matters of information to you, of course his opinion might have been that Mr. Sadleir, being in possession of them, they would be available to you equally as well as if he had divulged them?— No doubt it was, but Mr. Nicolson opened a letter from Captain Standish, by which he was directed to give me all the information in his power.
16360 Is it your opinion that Mr. Nicolson wilfully withheld from your information matters which were within his knowledge, which would act detrimentally to your carrying out your duties there?— I say he did withhold them—whether he did it wilfully I cannot say—because he gave me no information.
16361 Was the impression you formed then, that Mr. Nicolson, from bad temper or any other cause, did wilfully withhold information?— I did think that at the time.
16362 Do you think, from what has transpired since, that that was what actuated him?— Yes, I undoubtedly do.
16363 Might it not have been disappointment?— It might have been; he was annoyed equally with myself.
16364 Where is the difference in the two positions. If Mr. Nicolson was guilty of any act which would interfere with the service, it was very serious; and even if merely from temper and disappointment he did not communicate as he might, the evil would have been just as great?— That is for you to decide. I have merely stated the facts.....
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
