Royal Commission report day 51 page 8
The Royal Commission evidence for 8/9/1881
(see also introduction to day 51)
[[../../people/peN_P/nicolsonPAC.html|Ass Com Charles Hope Nicolson]] giving evidence
17232 There w as no justification for his returning them without your knowledge?— No.
17233 If he, after receiving those reports and sending them back for amendment, sent the amended reports to you, in which it was carefully excluded that it was known in the cave, and if he reported after that that it was not known in the cave, what do you say to such conduct?— Decidedly, if any man stated falsely he would be to blame. My impression still about the constables is that they were mistaken.
17234 That they gave it as an opinion?— Yes.
17235 You have read Detective Ward's report of the 3rd April-[inserted above]?— Yes.
17236 And he had their reports in his hands on the 2nd April, stating that they believed it was well known they were in the cave; what do you think of that?— I think he was very wrong in not sending me those reports. He might have sent me the amended reports too. I dare say he had a good deal of trouble up there with the men latterly, having been so long up there; and perhaps they were a little fanciful, and imagined that the place was known when they were mistaken. For instance, they stated they had seen girls going from the Sherritts' house to Byrne's. Now, the fact is, the people were sent by my knowledge, and therefore Detective Ward believed the men were wrong.
17237 But here is the point. Here is Mullane's memorandum- “I have called on Constable Falkiner for a report whether it has come to his knowledge that the outlaws' friends are aware of this party of police camped in the Strathbogie ranges.” On the 2nd April Constable Falkiner says, “I respectfully report, for the information of the Assistant Commissioner of Police, that it would be impossible to say that this secret duty has been carried out unknown to the outlaws' friends, as persons who are well aware of this party of police camped in the bush are continually visiting Mrs. Byrne's place, and sleeping there; and, from what has come under my notice, this duty must be well known to the outlaws' friends”?— Those were the Sherritts, and they were sent there by Detective Ward.
17238 You thought it wise to express your opinion on some of the evidence given by Detective Ward, and you are now asked on this particular matter-do you think it was right of Detective Ward to suppress that first report from Constable Falkiner, and not make you aware of it?— No. I think it would have been very much better for him to have done so, and it was necessary for myself to know anything of the kind.
17239 As a matter of fact was it not previous to that that you had received information from Captain Standish that the presence of the cave party was known at the depot?— No, that was at the withdrawal of the cave party. I heard from Captain Standish within a week after the cave party was established.
17240 Then was it right on Detective Ward's part, on the 2nd of April, to withhold from you the report of the constable who believed their presence was known?— I say it was wrong.
17241 Was not it misleading to you in the impression you had then formed?— It was. But then, in justice to Detective Ward, I feel bound to say that he may have considered that those men were mistaken under the circumstances.
17242 As a matter of fact, did Detective Ward ever acquaint you of those constables ever having sent in those first reports?— No, never; I was taken by surprise when the reports came in,
17243 Say a constable had prepared a report of any kind to be sent to the head of the police force —would any subordinate officer be justified, under any pretence whatever, in intercepting the progress of that report?— No, none.
17244 Then Detective Ward was guilty of an absolute violation of duty in preventing those report being forwarded?— He was; but it is very frequently the case, in the city and elsewhere, that if a Constable is ordered to make a report, and he misunderstands and writes what is not wanted, the officer gives it him back and lets him make another, and does not make the first known; but, of course, that is not with the view of suppressing anything.
17245 On Detective Ward's general character one witness spoke-did you have any complaints made to you as to any misconduct on his part in that way?— No, I think not. I think that was Wallace 's attack on Detective Ward, and I know he was always speaking against Detective Ward. I knew what kind of man Wallace was. I can read all those men, and I knew what he meant by his attacks on Detective Ward.
17246 As far as you know, there was no justification for it?— No. Detective Ward was a most hard-working sober steady man, and he was a most valuable man in this way, that he could find any person I wanted in that part of the country of whatever description. He would bring him on the very shortest notice.
17247 You remember the statement made by John Sherritt, that Mrs. Nicolson had gone up to Beechworth with a view of injuring his character; and you interjected that Mrs. Nicolson had been in Beechworth, but not for that purpose, and that it was not true?— Yes.....
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
