THE MEIKLE COMMISSION.

Greymouth Evening Star, 15 May 1906, Page 1

THE MEIKLE COMMISSION.

LAMBERTS* EVIDENCE. [by telegraph—special to the star. 1 DUNEDIN. May 11. ’1 he Dmiedin sitting of the Meiklo Commission has concluded. Their li.oiiors will sit at, Wellington on Monday. where further evidence and (lie addresses of counsel will ho heard. The sittings there are not likelyto he lengthy, as Judge Edwards leaves for Auckland and Judge Cooper for Dunedin on Friday to open the criminal sessions in each objective city on the 21st inst. Their Honors will again meet, in Wellington on 271 h dune to give further consideration to the .Meikle case, either in the way of Inaring any fresh evidence or of preparing their report in connection with iho Commission. The final day’s sitting here was occupied wholly- with (he evidence and cr sso.\aminalion of William Lambert. IT- denied emphatically that ho had put (lie skins on Meikle’s land or that, lie was in a conspiracy to have Meiklo c evicted wrongfully. He declared that when he was employed by (lie Ni w Zealand Investment and Mortgage Company as a private detective i" obtain a conviction against a person who was stealing sheep’from Islay farm, he did not suspect that Meikle was the thief, hut he soon formed an impression that Meiklo was a cunning man. The witness with a frankness that was refreshing told tho Cmjimis-si..-.I how, having formed this impressi .n. he went to work to test Meikle’s innocence or guilt in regard to tho depredations. 1 quote his testimony on this point : "In order to settle the question of Meikle’s guilt or innocence I determined to get into his confidence. On the occasion of his first, conversation with Meikle, ho asked me what I was doing there for tho Company and I fold him I was there to s.- • who was taking tho Company's sheep from off (heir land, and if I got a conviction against the person who was taking (hem 1 was to get £SO. Meikle's people were sowing grass se- d, and as L had some sed at. my hut, I said lie c-nhl have some. He said All right: Arthur would go down that night.’ Arthur Meikle did not come up for l!u- grass seed (hat. night. 1 think he' came the night after. He took away

half a hatful «*f seed, leaving ImSuci ii nine anil ten o’clock. 'I he n. \l time 1 met Abiklo ho asked me up t.o his house. Arthur meanwhile having cmne for the remainder of the crass seed. A little while after this, I spent, an evening with the Aleikle family. No mention was then made of the reason of my being on the .stall :ii. On one occasion I went to Meikle's stable and they were trying to leal-up the brand on a horse with a lotion. Arthur Meikle told me they were going to take the horse to Dunedin to sell it as soon as the brand was sufficiently healed. Young Meikle tdd me the brand had been altered.

lit* said it was ono of Karswoil W linos In.rsos, which had boon lost. T told Idol it was nothing to do with mo. T knew shortly afterwards that the hnrso had boon stolon and I gave information to tho ]i<diro. Bofnro tho 17tli October I had ant. into Meiklo’s c nifidonco. Ho asked mo to como and shear for him. and, if I did so, 1 was to shut my month and say nothing about what I saw. I was to got a share of tho proceeds of the wool. Tho sheep were to bo some om the Company's, some of Mr Brown’s and some of Mr Wallace’s. I remember the night I called at Gregg’s but. On my returning home, when about half tho distance f got over tho fence and there met Arthur Mcikle driving sheep. I asked him what ho was doing. He said ho was taking them homo to got e fat one. I let him get about 30 or dO yards ahead of me and then I followed. II saw him drive the sheep through a gate on to Meiklc’s land. I gut through the fence and rejoined young Meikle, while lie drove the sheep into the sheepyards. Tho elder Meikle came down with a lantern, which ho placed on a bag of lime or coal/ in tho smiljliy. Two or three sheep were then shoved through the door and tho rest followed. Arthur Meikle then counted the sheep. There wore 28. The sheep were then let out into tho yard except one which was kept back and killed by young Mcikle. The older Meikle went over to the house, and while he was away Arthur Meikle skinned the sheep, throwing the skin over some bags. , Then the elder Meiklo came back and told his son to cut tho ears off, and get the tire brand out. Ho said ho would defy tho company. I then wont back tc niy hut.. When the count was being made I hoard ono-of the Meiklos say there was one ram among tho sheep, Next day I reported the occurrence t< the manager of tho station. At Met kle’s trial I swore the dale of lh( theft to have been October 17th, bit I believe I qualified my statement, fixed tho date' as being that of tin night I went to Gregg’s hut and tin night McGcorgo left tho hut in Inver cargill. I asked Mr Gregg it ho knew tho [date was, aiid Jio replied that it was; the 17th. The night I saw the sheep stolen was the night of my visit to Gregg arid tfio occasion' of McGeorgci .leaving the hut. I now know that Mr .Troup fixes the date as the 18$i.” The witness emphatically denied ’ that ho had ever told Meiklo that ho was to get £o' for putting skins in his (Meiklo’s) smithy so as to get him ' convicted nor had he ever said that he was waiting for £lO of “blood money” from Mr Stewart after Meiklo’s nr-

hicmion of suill , r tho Company for "et°°ei nnn " iv l 10 ( P lmbert ) "’as to ... t -1000. Witness had always held Dial. In. was wrongfully convicted of perjury. He was 46 years of age, and had given up drink for II years. Beteiv that tune lie occasionally took .” I !"' ,h 1 “l«‘.r and had been” twice (lin’d for assault. About 23 years ago !" a drunken bout with some compan"■us he stole a hottlo of whisky, for "inch he got seven days’ imprisonment. With these exceptions there was nothing against Ids character. Cross-examined by Mr Atkinson: Witness denied that he had talked about sheep stea'ing and the fact that he was to receive £SO upon obtaining a conviction in a light and airy way in (he presence of Meiklo’s servants. After lie saw Meikle and Ids son altering the brand on tho horse he got more fully into their confidence. lie had never said to anyone (hat lie was going to put cither sheep or skins on Mejkha's place. TUa £SOOO which Meikle wrote fo say lie expected to got from (he Company was, he said, fo'be divided among four or live persons including witness. Robert Troup was re-caUrd to prove Rial no letter had ever reached him containing a statement that Meiklo offered to share the £SOOO among certain people. Flo was manager of the Islay station for two years after Mei--I'l‘pS conviction. In two months prior to this conviction, (here were about 87 sheep belonging to (ho Company missing. After the conviction there were no sheep missed. fllY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH.] [PER PRESS ASSOCIATION.] CONCLUSION OF THE EVIDENCE. WELLINGTON. This Day. The .Meikle Commission opened its sittings in Wellington this morning. John D. Reddy, manager of the City Chib, gave evidence as to a conversation with Lambert about 18 years ago, in which Lambert said if Meiklo did not steal tho particular sheen for which ho was convicted, he had stolen others. Thomas M. .McDonnell, Crown Prosecutor at Invercargill for over thirty years, gave Particulars of the prosecution in the Meikle The Meikle Com mission concluded taking evidence to-day. Dr Findlay staled he had a telegram from Mr Stoat, contradicting Mrs Meikle’s evidence as to the offer of £IOO if certain letters were

obtained. Dr Findlay also asked that Cameron's evidence should he taken on commission in London as to the accuracy of Sutherland's statement that ho (Cameron) said lie had set a trap for Meikle. Mr Atkinson offered no objection and the Court agreed. Mr McNah's evidence as to whether Meikle authorised him to accept £SOO in full settlement of his claims will betaken on his return from England. The Commission suggested that counsel might-write their addresses instead of delivering them in court. The counsel promised to consider the matter. The Commission adjourned sine die.

[ 11Y TELEGRAPH—SPECIAL TO THE STAR.] . DUNEDIN, This Day. In a letter to the press, .Mr W. A. Stout, solicitor, of Invercargill, says Mrs .Meikle in evidence makes some reference so I ask leave to make the following statements in justice to myself:—“l never had any conversation on the subject with Mrs Meikle or anyone else on her behalf, and never to my knowledge, saw Mrs Meikle at any time. I never had any conversation with Meikle or any member of his family regarding matters now the sub ject of enquiry by the Commission. I was living in Dunedin at the time when she speaks of having made some arrangement with me in Wyndham, and did.not leave Dunedin for Southland until a year or two after her husbfind’s release from gaol. I did not start practice in Southland until the year 1888, some two and ahalf year’s after Lambert’s conviction, and five or six years- after Meiklo’s release.