SOME INTERESTING EVIDENCE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2649, 21 December 1904, Page 16

SOME INTERESTING EVIDENCE.

CHRISTCHURCH, December 14.

The hearing of the slander case Captain Seddon v. T. E. Taylor was continued before Mr Justice Denniston this morning. The body of the court and galleries were filled with spectators.

Hubert George Mitchell, journalist, stated that he wav the parliamentary correspondent for the Lyttelton Times. On the night of October 29, 1903, he was in the press gallery of the House of Representatives and heard c speech delivered by Mr Taylor. According io his note Mr Taylor, in the course o>f his speech, used the words " o%urt-martial."

John Duthie, member of the House of Representatives, residing at Wellington, stated that on the night of October 29, 1903, he heard Mr Taylor make a speech in the House oil' the Imprest Supply Bill. He remembered Mr Taylor making, some references to a court-martial in South Africa on a New Zealand officer. He also remembered that in that speech Mr- Taylor had threatened to put on record the details of a court-martial held upon a New Zealand officer by Imperial officers. Dr Findlay : Do you remember whether, in answer io an Interjection by the Premier, Mr Taylor told the Premier that, he had better not challenge him, for he might take up the challenge, and that it would rankle in his mind for many a long day? — Witness: I remember Mr Taylor's words, but not the Premier's.

Did you speak to or see Mr Taylor after ho had made that speech? — Yes. Do you remember the exact words used at that irterview? — I said to~ Mr Taylor: " Your remarks were strong in the House this evening." He replied: "Yes, but it is all true. I will make it all good." I said: "I suppose you refer to young Seddon?" Mr Taylor nodded his head and we paited. Mr Taylor: When you asked me tho question did I reply as is alleged in the statement of claim : " Captain Seddon. He ran away and left his men, and was courtmartialled for it"? — No.

Did I use these words, which are the basis of this action : " Captain Seddon was court-martialled while on service in South Africa "? — No.

Did I u:-e tho words: "He was courtmart'allert and sent home before his time " ? —No.

What fo lowed this c«nversation ? When did you hear of it next? — The following morning at the breakfast table of the Wellington Club.

Who wero present then? — Mr M?.lot (of tho Bank of New Zeala«d). Mr Bethune (of the Bank of Au&i-ralasla), an.l Mr Wo~ton (solicitor) .

Wcs any question asked at the breakfast table whtch led jou to males any statement? — Tht-re wore dcubt<s -expressed whether you had referred +o Captain Seddon or uot, and I said that you had given me to understand that you had referred to Seddon.

When i.ext did you hear of that conversation? — That evening.

Whern-? — At the House of Representatives. The Premier asked rcr- to come nito his room.

What passed between you and the PremkrV — Hi aDcsrleJ to ms as a fa f lier, au.l

raid that his son had been maligned, and* he n-arrafcod the conversation and the remark I had made at tfoo elut> in the morning. Did you communicate the terms of the conversation to the Premier? — No. Do you know who did? — No. Have Mr Bethune a,nd Mr Western denied having done so? — Yes; they have both denied it. Witness suggested to the Premier, who was probing about trying to find out things, that be should write to witniesis, so that there should be no confusion es to what witness had said or explained, and the Premier did so. Mr Taylor : Regarding the practice of reporting in the House, do you regard the Hansard Gallery as being infallible in their reports? — Far from it. They are very bad. As a matter of actual fact, they cannot hear what is said. And what they report is contrary to what twa<; said? — Yes. The corrections are very voluminous? — Yes. And you have to strike out words which you arc ma.de to have u^ad in the House? — j Yes. The chatter in the galleries and the ! poise in the House make it very difficult indeed for the reporters to hear. I Have we not frequently discussed the appointment of Captain Seddon. as adviser to the Defence Department? — Yes. Has it not been frequently a topic of conversation in the lobbies? — That is so. The appointment wan adversely criticised ou account of CaptaL- Sheldon's inexperience. Were the criticisms on what was done by th<* Defence Department in the public ! interest? — I believe &o. J George Laurenson, M.H.R. for Lyttelton, i in reply to Mr Stringer, said he heard the speech of Mr Taylor in which some reference was made to a New Zealand offioer being court-martialled. He forgot whether it was a " New Zealand officer," or whether it was a "court-martial" or " martial-court, ' but ihe heard the speech. Witness had some ' conversation with Mr Taylor after the '■ &ppeeh. He oould not siy what passed. | Ho 1-aci had a good deal of convocation [ with Mr Taylor one way and another, and 1 could not repeat the words that had passed between them. Dr Findlay: What wa.s the effect of the conversation, then? — Well, the effect was that after the conversation I had the impira=ion that Mr Taylor had referred to ' Captain Seddon. Did you ask him to whom he referred in ! h-s spreeh? — I to not remember asking him j that- hut I remember there was a general discussion afterwards, and my impression was that thwe was no question but that the voieicnoQ was to Captain Seddon. You arp a ciocc personal friend of Mr Taylor? — \Te.=, for over 30 years. We live teeether in WeMinaton. • Del Mr Taylor mention Mr Pirani's name in_coimoct'o:i w'th tins matter* — Yea. 1 hlh Hci^r said that any l-eferenoo to Mr j Pirani ci'.H <vnv come in in cro-se-exa.min.a-j Hon. a'lo- +hat would be treating Mr LauTGnson as a hostile wittier. The question was whether witness could be treated as a lio\ril{> v-!t'ie=s. Mr Ktringor: You had a conversation with mo on Fvidav la^t? — Yes. Did yon not tell me you had asked Mr Tavlor in ivhom hr rrf erred in hi<= speech. and that he replied; Captain Seddon? — I Jo

not remember using those words. I remember asking you on what grounds you were asking me to give evidence, and that I could not repeat a word Mr Taylor said.

Did you not tell me you asked Mr Taylor to whom he referred, and that he said Captain Seddon? — Xo. You put those woKds into my mouth.

Did you net say yoti had told the same thing to Mrs Bean? — You asked me if I had told Mrs Bean, and I said I told her that there was no question .about it, that everybody knew that Captain Seddon was meant. We always understood that Captain Seddon was meant. Mr Taylor never denied it. It was understood in the Hcust by everyone.

In the discussion in the lobby, did Mr Taylor use Captain Seddon's name? — Yes.

It was in connection with the remarks made m the House? — Yes.

Witness said he could nofc_ remember the exact words used, but the impression was that Mr Taylor said he had referred to Captain Seddon and nobody else in hi 3 reference to South Africa and the inquiry.

Have you heard, as a matter of common rumour throughout the colony, that Captain Seddon's conduct through the South African war was open tr question? His Honor decided that the evidence wa9 inadmissable.

Mr Taylor : Don't you consider yourself justified in talking with the greatest freedom about public matters and public men in the lobbies of the House? — I do not know whether we are justified; I know we do it.

With regard to the "conduct of the plaintiff in South Africa, have you had any discussion on that subject with different; jrembers of the House at different times? — Yes. It was a matter of common discussion.

Arthur T. Gannon stated, in reply to Mr Stringer, that he joined the Fourth New Zealand Contingent, and served for 12 months with the contingent. After leaving the Fourth lu> joined tho Seventh at Statiderton, receiving the rank of sergeant. On May 31 an engagement took place in which captures of cattle and horses were effected. The cattle were abandoned for the time being owing to a storm and darkness coming on. Next morning the troop was sent out with the object of recovering the cattle. After describing the movements of the day witness said it would have been a very foolish movement for the main body to have gone across to- the scouts, for it would have been cut off from the main column. When the scouts returned the general rearguard action oommenced. Captain Saxby's troop supplemented the rearguard. The rearguard action continued tiil within a few hundred yards of Blessbok Spruit. He estimated that tho strength of the Boers was between 200 and 300. Captain Saxby and the main body pushed on to secure the drift, which was a good covering position.

By Mr Taylor : The position taken up by Captain Seddon across the spruit was a risky one, exposed to fire. Officers who said tho position was one of safety were absolutely wrong.

\lr Taylor was proceeding to ask witness whether Lieutenant Dillon made a statement as to the number of Boers there, vhen Dr Findlay objected. His Honor said lie would allow the au§#>

tion to see if it was proved that Lieutenant Dillon said something. Mr Taylor': If I bring witnesses to say that Dillon'" told Captain Seddon that the total number of Boers he was in touch with did not exceed 80, would you agree with that? — It would not be in accordance with my experience. His Honor said there was a distinction between the number of Boers and, the number, in touch with them. The phrase must be applied the same way in each case. Mr Taylor: If Lieutenant Dillon and other members of the scouts' party ,declare that in their opinion not more than from 80 to 100 Boers were" engaged that day altogether, would you say that is likely to be "correct?— Of course, • they' were capable of judging. I could only^ judge the Boers that I saw coming over the ridge. There "were from 200 to 300 Boers engaging the rearguard and the right flank. Was there a gathering of any kind at the .Clarendon Hotel to discuss this matter? —

There -were some jxmtingenters there.

"r" r Dr ( Findlay said- the "'witnesses met Mr . "Stringer and himself, which was quite the" visual custom. Witnesses had been meeting ; Mr Tayjqr all- over the place, but counsel i did noCptn»pose' asking what. passed c between j them.,' lt";was v^pot usual- to.^a^k^vfliat--- passed j > between .counsel' : -a'nd ) ""wHaS^sses;-/^ t> T/-could-i put some very" impertinent "questions if this kind of thing is to go on,'.' he added. j Mr Taylor^'iMy idea" is. that-, an_ 'arrange- J ment was' arrived, % at; between --witnesses to sustain the honour of the regiment at any cost. - ■ His ..Honor; (to -witness) : Was- there any such arrangement? — No, there was no arrangement at all. Andrew Petersen, tally clerk, of Napier, «aid he joined the Third ' Contingent arid remained with it nine months. He afterwards joined the Seventh Contingent, and •while with them received the rank" of sergeant. ..He. was. twice c serioiusly - wounded, and had .been, mentioned in despatches. He remembered the Blessbok Spruit mci"- " dent: He was a sergeant then. Witness narrated the movements of the eooijts and the main body leading up to the .time when, the main body sighted the scouts. The scouts then retired within the" rearguard, - being under protection all the way.- No casualties occurred.- -.Lieutenant Dillon then told witness -and his men to hold a ridge' until' he- (Dillon) retired to take up another rear post. Witness did- so, and then retired behind Dillon, and in this way a rearguard action was fought to the spruit. It was near the spruit that Dillon j was ehot. For a. distance of nearly- five miles a rearguard action had been fought to reach the spruit/ It would not have been a proper thing, for the main body to have gone on .to the position where the scouts were when the main body first sighted them. After crossing ".the spruit witness met Captain, Seddon, whose men were occupying a position from - ;- •«thich- the fire • could &£ directed at * the enemy to protect the crossing of the epruit by the remaining men of the ■ company. Witoess v did not see Captain SectdSh and his men ride three miles until they reached a. position of safety^ He saw nothing in the nature of a stampede. By Mr Taylor-: Something may have happened .that witness did not see. When tfie last of the . scouts reached the rearguard the main body, was perhaps a mile or two away. After? crossing the spruit the company was on the top of a kopje about.a mile- and a-kalf away. Mr Taylor: Have you always told the story you are telling to-day. — Witness : Yes, I have,. Have you never made violent attacks on ycur officers?— No. Have you threatened to write a book about irhe. conduct of your officers on that occasion? — No. Have you discussed with any of your comrades the wisdom of sticking together arid maintaining the honour of the regiment? — No, I have not. I may have said: "If they say Captain ..Seddon was a coward, •why not call us" all cowards. If he ran eway. ,we all ran away." Did you not discuse the matter in Willis street, Wellington, one night with four or five others? — No. What I talked about on that occasion was the way; that some pay was confiscated, and I said that if it was mot paid I would write to the papers about it Alexander Speedy, farmer, Waikato, said h« was in the Seventh Contingent. He was on© of the ecouts under Quintal. All the scouts got back safely to the reangaiard of the main body, and a rearguard action was then fought. Witness estimated that there irere 300 or 400 Boers attacking them. By Mr Taylor: The rearguard action was fought for two or three miles, arid all that distance the men fought a regular rearguard action. He did not know if men from the main body assisted in that action. H«* saw no men retiring irregularly. He was on the kopje when the men were reformed. It was a place of comparative Buf'cty. Arohibald James Harper, labourer, Foxfcon was a member of the Seventh Owitingent. After the scouts came back

to the supports- the main body retired to the spruit, and in . that retirement witness was in the advanced screen of the main body. Sometimes they retired at a smart ; walk, and sometimes they halted. The main , bedy, under Captain Seddon, was 600 yards \ in the rear of the screen. After crossing the spruit Captain Seddon took up a position ! on a hill, from which he could command the crossing of the spruit. If Captain Seddon and any nuanbsi-- of men had galloped away witness would have seen them. George Dick, farmer, ' Nelson, " ■ said he wenfc to South. Africa with the Seventh Contingent. The witness, who was in the advanced screen when the main body comni&noe'd to" retire, gave evidence that corroborated the previous witness's statements^ Daniel Alfred Jackson, tailor, Nelson, said: he was with Captain Seddon's main body j when a retirement was made towards Blessbek Sipruit. They retired at a fast walk. j The rearguard was 400 1 yards • behind the main body. When the main body crossed thajspTuit, the, .nearest men of-*he rearguard were 400' yards away. Witness and others wnsre told off to keep the spruit until the i .ecoufca got across, and they remained in their position for an hour,, Captain Seddon being, I jvifcirthem. was not a position-, of absolute safet-yf -They v/pre 'fired on by'theVenemy. !_ /Dr' Findlay : sDld Captain Seddon at 'any "tiine-" during that retirement -gallop away with. -J>is troop ?-jj-Witness : No. |; Tho-men had refreshments [-that clay; sdmeV'of ''{hem had only half a ; biscuit.

Lat. Cooper, clerk in the Land Offioe, Hokitika, said he was with Donkin and th© other scouts when" Captain Saxby 'signalled to them to mount, but somebody e'&s signalled to them to remain, and through that mistake the .^ere Je.{t_ at this "post. They" were' cut off from all assistance, and_ fought the Boers for over two liours. Ultimately Donkin was killed, and witness and the others , were taken prisoners. Wittjgsb did jiofc remember who posted the scouts in that position. Donkin, Collins, -Dent, and Ireland were the other scouts.

Mr Taylor: ."Did. you not tell someone coming over 'from the Coast on the coach <h ' Friday that you were not in the enga.aiemenit at all?

f Witness: I was not in the Kaffir Spruit engagement. - Thomas G. Stevenson, coal miner, Puponga, said that when the retirement was in progress he was under Captain Saxby. The main body was 400 yards away all the way to the spruit. The retirement was made at a smart walk. He saw nothing of Captain Seddon and his troop .galloping away for miles until they, reached a position of safety. Witness would say that there were from 200 to 250 Boer 3 r opposed 1 to them. < . Mr Taylor: Have you discussed with ot}i«r members, of the contingent the number of Boers opposed to you? — Witness: \& have chatted to them.

• Have you made any arrangement that you ought to stand by the regiment in this ■action a«d not see it brought into discredit? — I have said that we ought to stand by it and not see it disgraced. That is so. With what other witnesses have you discussed- tli© question of maintaining the honour ,qf the regiment in this action? — Not -with anyone. You have just told us that you did. Did you not go to the Clarendon Hotel on Monday to have a discussion on the matter with your comrades? Dt JTindlay : I was at that meeting and saw the witness there, and if Mr Taylor is going into this matt&r I shall have something to say.

. His Honor said he had not taken any objection to Mr Taylor's question, knowing that the matter would be . cleared up in re-examination. Mr Taylor ought to put his questions plainly, and not ask in a vague way if it had been decided to uphold the honour of the regim&nt. Mr Tavlor (to witness) : Would you not consider it wrong to say anything to give away the reputation of the regiment? — Witness: I think I would speak the truth no matter which wav it went.

Hubert Franois Miller (farmer. Motueka) and Adam Blair (engine-driver, Greymouth) also gave evidence, which was very much on the lines of that given by other witnesses.

At 5 p.m. the court adjourned until the following morning.