WILLIAM LAMBERT'S EVIDENCE

Otago Witness, Issue 2722, 16 May 1906, Page 29

WILLIAM LAMBERT'S EVIDENCE

CLOSE OF THE DUNEDIN SITTINGS

Ninth Day — Feiday.

The Eoyal CommiHsion to ir<juire into Ihe guilt or otherwise of John James Meikle for shsop-stealing in Southland in 1887 and other matters resumed its sitting or. Friday morning. Mr A. R. Atkinson (Weiiiugton) appeared for Mr Meikk and Dr Firdlay (Wellington) for ihe Crown.

Further evidence was given for tbe Crcwu

William L,:mbert ?air. that in the year 18£7 he was workirg for tbe New Zealand Morigage and Inv-est'-je it Company. He had previously b&en d0i.113 cr=iwl -svork frr C<~nstab'e L"»"e, serving suiEraon&ca sx.d general bailiff work. Either Constable L-^eco «r Mr Trcxip suggested to him jfcboni er-t-3:i;g the toazpaay's .■^jrv.ce. H9 was ?rgcged by uhe latter He was to get £1' a week and £'.0 if he got a conviction against the i>e-r=o3 who »v?.s .stealing cheep from the Tslay Sstrte.

Dr Pindlay W-cs tbere ever a^ any tixe-e any arrangßmeTit bstween yen. Troup. Stewart, or ' Cameron t'ar.t you were tc put skins on Meikle!s land? — Xo 2«ver a v.-ord of it.

Exs-nimation continiMc! : He h,i<l see'i lleikla a few t:m3s before his enga^»me:it by tfc-s company-. Ha knew him. by ref ate lion. Before he entered the employ of the r-orapany he had no sifwAon ihit Meikle was the thief. Ho knew Jl'mV-? '.a b" a, very cunning man. After he joined-ths company's service he lived in a hu; jiear ifeikle's :.md. H? went ih.ere 'ibout tha 2nd September lEB7. Ha 'nurt tlicught c"Jt a method to Bvsrcitsin whether I^'kle -A-a? the thief. He hsxd devr-nined to get into Mwkle's confidence. One dsy -vvitness =?.w My?ikl« on his land, tak-ns- stones off it. They had a conversation. Ifojkle asked witness woat he •was there for mid witness said '' I am bpre to see who ie taking shc-ep from Die comunny's land." He also said that ii he go* a conviction he was to ge f £50. He- started !.t onre to gat into Meikle'3 confidence. A +aam of Meikle' s was sowing grass peed, and witi'e". »rd Meikl? that if he wanted a bag or two of seed he would give it to him. Witnoss had houi« seed at rhe hut. Meikle paid that vis s-_«o Arthur would go round for tbe se«J that night. On the night of the following day the boy come for th? r«ed. and stayed twe hcuii. He look oway lia'f a sack of s:oeJ, and cju-e bsck r.cst night for the other half. Later on witness visi-ted Meik'.e's house by invitation, and spent the evening. He «r.id no* a word as to why be was there. After that, witness frequently «aw Meikle and bis sou. On anotheT occasion ■witness went to Meikie's stable. Meikle and his son Arthur ware trying to heal up a brai.d on a hpr^e, using a lotion. The brand on the fcoree had been altered. Ycung Meikle said tha hoTK was to !>e taken to Dunedin and so.d. He a'so said thst the brand had been altered, and that it was one of Carswell. While. and Col's fcorses that had been lost. "Witness remarked tbat it bad nothing to do -with him. Witr.e=s £?ve information to the police abcut the «-3? ling cf the horse. One day Meik!e afked witness if he would sh«ar sheftD-for h-m. addi«2T that if he did so he wou'.d need to keep bis mouth shut and say nothing abcut what he 'aw. Sheer* bdongiag ts tbe crnnpary to Brown, and to other parties were to bs =born. and witness was to get a. share of the proceeds of tbe sale. On the nigbt of the theft vritness was at Gregg's hut, and on his way home he met Arthur Meikle driving sheep. Witness naked him where be was going with the nheepf tne 1)ov SR^ c was ta^ ng them iKsme to gef a fat one. Witness walked 30 or 40 varda behind Arthur Meikle. He thought i'*best not to walk with Arthur Meikle as coimow might nave come along and scan them together Tbe sheep were put into the smithy, and one of tbem was killed by Aithur M-oik'.c. The elder Meikle had come on tbe Bcene, and by- his chrec+ion Arthur cut the ears psicL fire-brand hern the skin and removed the paint bra-id. Meikle then remarked that be could itf™ the mmKaiiv or xnvone el^e. There were 2S shepp in the mob, irc'ud.na; one ram. WLtiic<=s knew that the =heep were stolen. Xeu duy he reported tbe whole matter to the manager. As to the date on which this happened witness bad stewed tha* it was the 17th be*, although it did not appear in tbe judpp's m>s. be thought hs afterwards qualified tha* statement. Witness fixed tbe date by th<? ni-ht he was at Gregg's and tbe day that Mac George left his hut It was not * wild or wet night. If it bad been a bad day MacGeotge would not have left. Witcess on his 'rial was not able to pledge his wcrd that it wa='one of tbe company's sheep tbat was killed. Dr Fmdlay Did you tell Meikle you were to get £50 to rat sheepskins in the gmatayior the purrose of getting him convicted?—Witne"' Xo.

D d ycu ev»r MT him that two men weTe to go— one in white and yourself in dark clothes — <vnd thai If-eik'-^ w»s to 6^ a gtin a-nd

rush forward and tie one of you and band him over to tbe police? — 2Co. Tbat is all new to 3 - ou 9 — Yes. Did you ever tell Mrs Meikle th.s same story? — Xo. Or Mrs Shields? Even James Meikle, who was then a boy of 12 years, says he beard the story? — It i 3 wrong Those who say they heard it are mistaken. It is suggested that you put two skins in barn? — No I did not. Examination continued . He denied that in an hotel b?.r in Invercargill he was asked by Meikle ro speak truthfully. He also denied that he remarked that he was waiting for £10 of b!ood money from Stewart. Witness got a ' letter from Meikle asking him to shear his sheep. He had received an earlier letter Btating that if witness would not say anything about what he had seen he would sue the company for £5000, and give witness £1000 of it. Witness's wife also saw that letter. Witness never told Temoleton that the company wanted him to go for Meikle, but that be would stick to Meikle. Templeton fixed tbe date of the conversation as the 24th of August, 1887, and witness was not employed by the company at that time. He informed Mr Troup that he had given some grass seed away. The company paid the £50 to witness's wife in instalments. Dr Findlay : Have yon ever admitted 'to anybody that you were rightfully convicted? — No. Have you ever, since your conviction, said that you were wrongfully convicted? — Yes. And you declare so tc-day on oath ? — Yes. Witness continued : He was 46 years of age. He had not tasted drink for the laat 11 years. He was in goal for two years and eight months. Dr Findlay mentioned that Lambert got a remission of his sentpneo as he had rescued some people at the Heads. Witness continued : He had been a voluntary abstainer for tbe last eight years. H* bad committed a couple of minor pssanl + s, aa Dr Findlay mentioned tbe other lay. When witness went to goal he had a wife and six- children, who were left unsupported. Witness's wife was now lyine ill in Invercargill (doctor's certificate produced). By Mr Atkinson: He hpd never loen charged with the theft of a watch. He was in Waikaia at one time; he was not arres^d there. On his trial be wa3 defended by Mr Macalister, whose- costs be Daid when he was liberated. It wae witness's scheme to get ths confidence of Meikle and his son. He did j not want to get the confidence of the others ' in the home. When be was in "the house he might have mentioned that he was going to get £50 if be peenred a conviction. , Mt Atkinson drew attention to witness's previous evidence, when he °aid that nothing was said in the house about tbe £50. Witness said be might have mentioned the ouestion of the £50 in the hou*e. If any of them had asked him about it he would not have kept it ?. secret. Mr Atkinson . Mrs Meikle says you gamimned to be her husband's friend 9 — Yes. Would it not have worked in with that 3cheme T- ery well to have talked about the matter in her presence in a light and airy way o—That0 — That is not tho w?y T worked. I did not run about telling Mrs Meikle and others .nv-b'isiness. And you did not mention it in the pre?ence of the servants and others? — I do r.ot think -o

Cro"!=-exft)T)inition continued- After witness -nw what 'Meikle aud bis son were doins to the horse he was taken more fully into their confidence. He thought he took Meikle by surprise on this occasion. [Witness was nueationed in detail as to statements made <hat day and statements at Meikle's trial, and at his own trial. The discrepancies weie flight.] In regard to the date witness said that in tbe Supreme Court be fixed tbe date a-, the 17th. It was the day Mac George went mvay. When be saw HacGeoree in Invercargill bo asked him the date, and ilacGeorge fixed i*, as tbe 17th. He was quite clear that he •»nid nothing to Heinle or onvbedy <»l=e about j-.ntti'rc skins on Meikle'« land. He never asW! MacGeoTEie for two «kins for a mat. He •nukl have helped bimrMf if he had wanted them. TTo rpmcviberwi lieonng of young Meikle being ill. He did not know it for t> fact Hut fancied he wa« not ;!1 It was abou* 6 o'clock that be sot bis knife sharpened at Meikle's one ri^ht He iot it sharpened because he wn« "■oing to kill «omp sheen at the «tation. He •I'd not roTW»mb»r Meikle savin? that that was 1 .-pee *imc to come to e p t his knife eharptwd Tlie SSO m» caid 12 month-- or more after :t: t wa« clue He bnd denied t'mt ha bad -c«ived the money. md that was tli^ fact, as the mouev wps rraid to Ins wife ard •ir<t to him. Tbe £5000. concerning which Meikla had writ^! 1 : ♦*> him wa.« to be =hp.'ed anions four — "VVadf\ F.'nn. Meiklf\ and witness Witness •»nw 1 d do' sv-aar it wa= a letter from M«ik'o. TTr- t'no-;:?'-ii be save tr-p letter to Mr Tmy W : t*if=« did Tot in];* *he ntecautioi) c s nnkine- a co^v of tbe l» + ter before he in-trd witb il..i 1 .. "Wit^c--* dWed tbe evidence of George Davie witV reeard to gra^ seed^ birh-wire "vnd other rnatteTS Tt wa« not *rue that MacG»orgo Wt «ome -skii= for witness ; ianering on a fencp. "Witness did "ct -remember discussing M<*ikle'» ca=e with Mr ReadmeIt was not h-ue tbat Mr Reading asked him. "Bid Meikle Btenl the skins'" and that witness r^nh^d " I do not know. I wanted £50 mid I ?r>t it."' Kobftrt Troirp, recalled said in. revuy to D-- Findlnv. tbat he did cot remember receiving a 'etter from Lambert with reference to sharing JcSOOfl. which T.am-bart si id be bad received -from Meik'e. He remembered that auch a letter was <=r:ok^n about. He wn« -ilransfc certain tbe was pot handed to him. In ISB7 two mnsters of abeep were made and :t: t was -cund th.it <*7 =heeo l^od disappeared. Karly n April, ISSB another must*-'- was made, and there was no loss worth record inc. Mr Justice Cooner said ths^ the fact that the loss woi small was open +o the interpretation that tbe sevfin vear=^ imprisonment nassed on ileikle ''ad deterred sheep stealeis from carrying on their operations. To Mr Justice Coooer He was <mre be never -saw tbe Wter in which tbe £3000 wa.s ro-nt.oned If Mrs Lambert said she liarded ln'in the letter she must be making a mistake. He would have remembered such a letter Tbe- co»nmiisir>ri adjourned to meet in Wellington on Monday.