GOLDFIELDS MURDERS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19808, 1 December 1927, Page 15

GOLDFIELDS MURDERS.

THE REWARD OF £IOOO. CLARKE'S CLAIM DISMISSED. -NO LEGAL OR MORAL RIGHT." • v 1. . i. '•' -'• 1 • V Reserved judgment was given last week by the Full Court of the High Court of Australia in the appeal by the Crown against the judgment of the Full Court of Western Australia in respect of the claim made by Evan Clarke to recover £IOOO for information given in respect to the goldfields murder. Judgment was in favour of the Crown. On May 21, 1926, tho Western Australian Government, through the police, offered a reward for information that would lead to the arrest and conviction of the person or persons who committed the murder of John Joseph Walsh and Alfred Henry Pitman, two detectives, who were making inquiries in regard to the theft of gold. On Juno 6 Clarke and a man named Treffene were arrested on a charge of murdering Walsh, and on June 10, while in custody, Clarke made a statement, in consequence of which a man named Coulter was arrested. In August, 1926, Treffene and Coulter were tried, and Clarke waws called as a witness on behalf ■of the prosecution, and repeated tho statement he had made to tho police. ■ Treffene and Coulter were both convicted and executed, and Clarke, who was from custody, biought,an action ■claiming the reward. His claim failed, ■whereupon he appealed, but his appeal was disallowed. Tho Full Court set aside that judgment and allowed tho appeal of Clarke. The High Court of Australia has now reversed that judgment, and allowed the appeal of the Crown. In giving his reasons, Acting-Chief Justice Isaacs said: "In g.ving the .information Clarke was acting exclusively in order to clear, himself from the false charge of murder, and not with reference to a general request by tho community for information against other persons. He was not acting for tho sake of justice or from any impulse of conscience, or because ho was asked to do so, but simply and solely on his own initiative to secure liis own safety from the hand of tho law, and altogether irrespective of tho proclamation. He has, in my opinion, neither a legal nor a moral claim to the areward." Mr. Justice Higgins said: "Clarke csnnot succeed in this action unless be can establish a contract between the ■Crown and. himself. lam of the opinion that there was no contract." Mr. Justice Starke said: "In my opinion the true principle applicable to this typo of case is that unless a person performs tho conditions of the offer, acting ripon its faith or in reliance upon it, he does not accept the offer, and the offerer is not bound to him."