H.—36

9

I am quite at a loss to understand how you could have contented yourself with the very imperfect evidence with which you were apparently satisfied. The case was, at any rate, one of grave suspicion, and it was clearly your duty to have called Major Cooper, whom you must have known would have given important testimony. The following points, however, were clearly established, notwithstanding the lax and careless way in which you conducted the inquiry:— 1. That the mare was worth £40. 2. That Mr. Lovell did actually pay £35 for the mare, and that Captain Eowe received that amount for her, of which only £30 was paid to the public credit. 3. That Captain Eowe repaid to Mr. Lovell £5 of public money without authority, or making any report to his superior officers. And, 4. That the Government lost at least £5 by a deliberate act of Captain Eowe. Now, the charge for such an inquiry as you were conducting was clearly divisible into two parts : — 1. Had the mare been sold for £35 ? And, • 2. Supposing this to be proved, had Captain Eowe applied the £5 to his own use; and if not, what had become of it ? Yet, with the above facts established, and further evidence available, you simply, without remark or comment, report as your opinion that Captain Eowe was not guilty of the first charge, and that it had been preferred maliciously. The second charge relates to the falsification, by Captain Howe's orders, of the accounts of two men-—Baskevillc and Flynn—with the view to obtain seven days' working pay for his own use, thereby defrauding the Government of £2 2s. The manner in which you took the evidence relating to this charge is even more unsatisfactory than that upon which I have already commented. It was clearly your duty to have ascertained from the witnesses the actual date upon which the men went on pass ; the date on which the passes expired; the reason why, if Captain Eowe expected the men to return, he caused the Government to be charged with the days on which he knew the men were absent, instead of the days when the passes had expired ; the date on which Captain Eowe first considered the men were deserters ; the date upon which he actually drew the pay which had not been earned; the date upon which he informed the Paymaster of what he had done ; the date and manner in which the money was returned to the public account; the date upon which the uniforms were paid for, the cost of which is alleged as a reason for having obtained the money; the fact whether or not Captain Eowe had uniforms thrown upon his hands in any true sense; the names of the men to whom, and the dates upon which, the uniforms of Baskeville and Mynn were disposed of; the nature of the explanation of Captain Eowe to the Paymaster, which satisfied that officer. Tet, notwithstanding that you failed to put upon record any one of these important facts, it is established beyond dispute from the evidence, — 1. That the accounts of Baskeville and Flynn were falsified by order of Captain Eowe in September last, and that he then drew aud applied to his own use seven days' working pay on account of these men, which had never been earned. 2. That no report of this circumstance was made by Captain Eowe to the Paymaster until the following March after this charge had been preferred, when, by the connivance of that officer, the seven days' pay wrongfully drawn in September was, under false pretences, returned to the public account. The charge, therefore —" That Captain Eowe in September last so falsified the working pay accounts of certain men of his corps (Baskeville and Flynn), in order that ho might obtain for his own use their, working pay, amounting in all to seven days' pay, and that consequently the Government lost their seven days' working pay " —was fully proved. How you can have permitted yourself, with these facts proved, to report that Captain Eowe was not guilty of this charge, and that it had been maliciously preferred, is altogether past my comprehension ; but before making any further comment, I will await any explanation you may desire to give. I have, &c, Major Gordon, &c, Auckland. H. A. Atkinson.

No. 7. Major Gordon to the Under Seceetabt for Defence. Sic,— Auckland, 29tli June, 1875. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of a communication, dated Wellington, 26th Maylast, signed by the Hon. Major Atkinson, censuring me in exceedingly harsh terms for the manner in which, in his estimation, I conducted an investigation at Newcastle into certain specific charges which were preferred against Captain Eowe, of the Engineer Volunteer Militia. I apprehend that you were not in "Wellington at the time that this letter was written and recorded in your office, or you would have ventured to point out to the Hon. Major Atkinson the course always adopted when proceedings of Courts are considered not to have been properly conducted. I must assume that the Hon. Major Atkinson was acting, although he has not so informed me, for the Hon. Sir Donald McLean, who was not absent from the colony, and who, at the date of Major Atkinson's letter, had not abandoned the exercise of his defence and military functions ; and when I transmitted the proceedings of the Court on Captain Howe to you, I did so under the impression that they would be placed in the hands of the convening Minister, the Hon. Sir Donald McLean, as a confidential document ; but of this sacred character they were soon deprived, by the circumstance of their having been submitted to the manipulation of five or six copyists before being finally disposed of by the convening Minister. Sir Donald McLean, having previously had the matter for inquiry under his consideration, resolved 2—H. 36.