Royal Commission report day 8 page 10
The Royal Commission evidence for 5/4/1881
(see also introduction to day 8)
Francis Augustus Hare giving evidence
1517 Was he a supposed supporter of the Kellys?— Not in any way.
1518 Not by them?— Not in any way. He was not a supporter; he was, I think, one of the most respectable and reliable men that had ever been engaged in that capacity during the Kelly search. He was a little too sanguine, and after he left the office I said to Mr. Sadleir, “Well, this looks rather black for me, that these men are going to commit some outrage at once.” He said, “Oh, that man has been giving us this information for months;” besides he said, “He is the most sanguine and tantalizing man I ever met.
1519 Had Mr. Sadleir faith in him?— Yes, all of us had; no one doubted he was doing his best. Mr. Sadleir said on one occasion, some months ago, he wrote to Mr. Nicolson a letter not giving much information—the old thing that they were about, and he could not get any definite information; and after writing the letter and signing his name, he added a postscript, that since he had written the letter most important information had been received, and to be ready to start at a moment's notice. He said, “We heard nothing of him for three or four weeks, and we were kept in the highest pitch of excitement, and then it turned out to be all a mistake, or the information not so good as he expected.” I think I have stated I mentioned this man's name to Mr. Nicolson when he relieved me on the first occasion.
1520 Did you state he had been in your pay?— I do not remember whether I had paid him anything ever; at any rate he was not a paid agent on day wages.
1521 During Mr. Nicolson's time?— I do not know. I was at his house on three occasions, and have met him.
1522 Was he following any other occupation besides acting as agent?— Yes, he was following his ordinary occupation in life. I state this for the reason to show that I did not put my faith in working by agents alone; but I formed parties, that is to say these watch parties, and also men at Benalla, Wangaratta, and Beechworth. I shifted one of Mr. Nicolson's agents from one place to another. I believe he intended doing it himself when I relieved him. It was suggested to me by Mr. Sadleir to do so, and it was a very good move I think. I had no increase of constables in the district when I went there (that is the second time); but in forming those parties I merely shifted the men from less important stations, so that in the event of the Kellys being seen at Beechworth or in that district the Beechworth men could at once proceed without taking up a special train with a large body of men, and its becoming known all over the country, because I might tell you those outlaws used to use the telegraph in their way as well as we did. I will give you an instance. When the sympathizers were arrested, amongst others there was a man, Tom Lloyd you have heard of over and over again. He asked the gaoler if he could send a telegram away, and one of the warders said yes, and he sent a telegram to the following effect to somebody at Greta:— “Turn the four bullocks out of the paddock.” This was not reported to us for some weeks afterwards, and then it was reported to us. Undoubtedly it meant, turn the four outlaws out of the paddock in which they were in. Therefore, I say they were well able to tell their friends when special trains left with police along the line of railway.
1523 Had you your own, the Bourke men, with you on the second occasion?— No; I had just men that I found at Benalla. I had one man, Canny, and another of the name of Barry, who had been out with me one or two trips. I wish to state to the Commission that I cannot speak too highly of the assistance rendered to me by Mr. Sadleir, although he was opposed to my relieving Mr. Nicolson; and wrote and begged me not to come up. Still, when I did go up, he afforded me all the information in his power.
1524 Have you got that letter?— It is a private one. He said that it was a fatal mistake in my coming up.
1525 Did he assign any reason, that it would not be fair to Mr. Nicolson, or any reason?— Both, I think. The purport of the letter was that it was a fatal mistake of Captain Standish to relieve Mr. Nicolson, and send me up in his place; and he added that many mistakes had been made, and this was the greatest mistake of the lot in his opinion.
1526 Did he give you any reason for that?— No, he gave no reason beyond saying it was a mistake. He said— “We have gained some information during the past eleven months.” I may state to the Board that on my relieving Mr. Nicolson I was thrown into a position, and the most difficult task imposed upon me, with a far greater amount of responsibility than I can possibly explain to you. The whole affair rested on my shoulders.
1527 The whole of the responsibility of the Kelly capture?— Yes, the whole of the responsibility of the Kelly business; and one false move, I might commit the most fatal mistake, and it might end in everlasting disgrace to me. I think it right to say this, because of certain statements that I was afraid to go there, and different reasons given why I did not go, or objected to go there. My reasons were—I felt that there being other officers senior to me, it was unfair to impose such a responsibility on me when I had not the rank that entitled me to be put into such a position.
1528 What you mean by rank is that there were seniors in the service?— Yes.
1529 Two?— Four.
1530 Not subordinate in position?— No, I was their subordinate; that is to say, there is a certain way in which officers come upon the list, which has not yet been explained to the Board. You see how the list stands there—[handing in a paper].....
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
