17

H.—36.

77. Supposing the person who made the charge called no witnesses, is the case to collapse on that account ?—lt is usual for the person making the charges to call witnesses. 78. If names transpired during the course of the evidence, and it was necessary to call them in order to elicit the truth, do not you think that the persou holding the inquiry, Major Gordon, should have called all witnesses he thought necessary to give evidence ? —I think so ; but it appears to me that Major Gordon made up his mind, and did not think further evidence necessary. I think it would have been very much better if Major Cooper had been called. 79. To make the inquiry as exhaustive as possible ?—Just so. 80. Has the Government made any further inquiry into this matter ?—None that I am aware of. 81. Mr. Hislop.~] Do you think these men have been wrongly treated?—lt astonishes me to find that these men claim anything. 82. You said something about the advantage Major Gordon had in seeing the demeanour of the witnesses in the box. Putting aside this advantage altogether, do you think the evidence given by these witnesses supports the charge ? —lt is a question which I do not think I should be called upon to answer. It is the opinion of the Minister that Captain Rowe was not fit to remain in the force. I have already come to the conclusion that they are both right; that Major Gordon, from what he heard and saw, came to an opinion, and that Major Atkinson read over the papers and came to another opinion. 83. Do you think, after reading over the papers, that the charges were proved ?—They look strong against the officer. 84. On what ground do you think these men would be entitled to any consideration, even supposing they were put to expense ? Was it upon their evidence that Captain Rowe's services were dispensed with ? —On numerous evidence. 85. Was it consistent to say at the same time that their evidence was untrue, and the charges were not proved ? —I should be very sorry to say their evidence was not true. 86. Would you positively come to the conclusion that the charges were not proved, and, at the same time, say that their evidence was not true ?—I should not like to say that. There are a great many witnesses besides. 87. To what extent does their evidence go? Does it go towards proving any charges?— Their evidence alone would be useless. That is what I think of it. 88. You say that one of the men resigned. Was it in consequence of the disagreeable position he was in through the charges falling through ? —There is nothing in the papers to show it. 89. Wouldn't he be justified in looking at it in this way : Major Gordon has branded me as a liar; I must resign ? —I do not see that the Major has branded him as a liar. They give evidence to the best of their belief, and, on theirs and others', he comes to the conclusion that the officer was not guilty. 90. The Chairman.'] Could they have remained in the corps with any comfort to themselves after that inquiry took place ? —lt might be made warm for them, as Mr. Swanson says. They could have waited for that. 91. When Major Gordon was appointed, was he considered in the light of a Magistrate, or not there as a person to investigate the proceedings of the officers, and to get the evidence in the best way he could? —Yes, and he was ordered to report. 92. If he saw that any evidence was required, ought he not to have got it ?—I think so. It was his duty to get as full information as he could for the Government. 93. Do you agree with Major Atkinson, that he ought to have investigated a number of points arising in the evidence which he did not do ?—lt would have better if he had done so. 94. Mr. Sivanson.~\ Is it not a fact that officers, as a class, look with very great disfavour on noncommissioned officers or privates who endeavour to oust an officer; he does not like him? —I do not see why he should like him. 95. Might not the demeanour of a witness be influenced by the officers trying the case?— Possibly. 96. If there is any bias in the demeanour of the officers who try the case, is it not wholly in favour of the officers, and not the privates ? —That I cannot say. I think it would have been better to bring forward all persons who could give any information, so as to make the matter full and clear to the Government. 97. If there is any bias at all, is it not in favour of the officers ?—I should not like to say so. 98. Mr. Murray.] Are you aware of any irregularity in the conduct of business by Captain Rowe in the Waikato ? —Not that I am aware of. 99. Are you aware that Captain Howe had occasion to advance money to procure tools for the men to work with, owing to the Public Works Department having failed to provide these tools; that he did this at his own expense, and was never repaid by the department ?—I have never heard that. 100. Then you think the department has been conducted in a regular and businesslike way ?—I simply know nothing about it. 101. The Chairman.] How are military Courts of Inquiry constituted ?—lf charges are preferred against an officer, and further inquiry is thought necessary, the General Officer directs his BrigadeMajor 102. But in New Zealand ?—ln New Zealand, if charges are made against an officer, I would be very likely instructed to assemble a Court of Inquiry, under the authority of the Minister. I would order the Court to be assembled of three officers under the Act, to inquire into the charges. I would constitute the Court in accordance with the Act. 103. Are there no rules in existence in the colony? —No. 104. Then a military Court of Inquiry would be conducted in the same way as in the Imperial service ? —They would be left pretty much to themselves. 105. As a matter of practice, how is a military Court of Inquiry in New Zealand conducted?— They endeavour, as a rule, to follow the English rules. 3—H. 36.