18

H.—22

That is the formula usually observed on such occasions, and it is usually sufficient for all purposes. But in a subsequent letter—the letter of the 23rd April—it contained this statement: "As a "matter of fact, in this case, when I failed to receive your resignation, as promised, by Saturday " night, I did advise His Excellency the Administrator to dismiss you on Monday morning from all " your offices, and His Excellency signified his acceptance of my advice as to your dismissal. Upon " receiving your resignation late on Sunday night, I recommended that your resignation should be " accepted, and His Excellency was pleased to approve of that recommendation, in place of the one " for your dismissal." This is a manifestation of that vindictive and domineering spirit which has become a recognised part of your character. It is a bombastic, a wanton attempt to wound, which no man of chivalrous feeling would resort to. The resignation, and its acceptance, would have satisfied any man of true manly spirit, but it was not enough for a man of the cast of character of Sir Harry Atkinson. You go on then to say, " My reason for recommending His Excellency to dismiss you was that on Satur- " day I discovered you had made, during the last few days you had held office, such an extraordinary " use of your Ministerial position that I did not consider it right you should remain in a position " which enabled you to deal with public records in an improper manner. I found you had caused " to be printed at the public expense for your own use the file of papers relating to the Junction " Brewery prosecution, the file relating to Hamilton's case, and a selection from a file relating to " Mr. Jackman. In each of these cases not only were the papers printed, but also the official and " Ministerial minutes." The Ministerial minutes are my own Ministerial minutes. As to the reasons above set out, I am led to believe that you knew nothing of the printing of the papers until Monday, the Bth. If that is so, the printing of these papers cannot have formed any part of the reasons for my dismissal put before His Excellency the Administrator by you on Sunday, the 7th. A demand from Parliament to be furnished with the reasons will, however, set at rest any question as to what the reasons actually were. I welcome this opportunity of explaining all that is contained in the last-quoted paragraph from your letter. In the first place, my late experience of you taught me that in dealing with you I had to deal with a man who played with the button off his foil. Ask any unbiassed man to read the leading articles in the Wellington Evening Press of the 25th and 26th March, the information for which was supplied by a person not unconnected with the Government, and the leading articles in the New Zealand Times of the 27th and 28th March, of which newspaper you are the political director and inspirer, and then ask that man to give his impression of the nature of the case I should be called upon to answer. The articles teem with falsehood. I knew the case I should have to rebut, and I determined to provide for it. This was not a case governed by any ordinary rules of etiquette. I printed the papers, and they were printed, not for my own use, but for the use of Parliament, notwithstanding your expression of opinion to the contrary. They will be duly placed before Parliament. You say, " All this was done secretly, without the knowledge of any of your colleagues." Am I a child. I had been made aware of the existence of the intrigue against me, in which three members of the Cabinet were engaged, and I determined not to be caught all unprepared. I knew that you would have full access to the departmental papers in the case you intended to make against me; and do you think lam really such an innocent person as to be so neglectful of my own interests as to leave 1 myself in the position of having to meet you with my hands tied behind my back ? Armed with these papers, I shall meet you on equal terms. I put this general question :Is not every man entitled to the best available defence ? These papers were necessary as a defence to the charge foreshadowed in your letter of the Ist April. As to Jackman, how fortunate that I have copies of the papers relating to him! The time for their usefulness was not long in coming. I was simply astounded upon reading his evidence, as published in the newspapers during the hearing of the Junction Brewery cases. How Mr. Skerrett got his information Ido not know, nor do I care. Jackman's charge against Mr. Hill, Collector of Customs, Auckland, was well known to the police and to the Police Department, Mr. Hill having threatened to prosecute Jackman criminally, and the Police Department having, upon Mr. Hill's demand, made an investigation into the circumstances connected with the lamented death of Mrs. Hill. But Iso disbelieved the newspaper reports of Jackman's evidence in the Junction Brewery cases —I could not possibly believe them to be correct —that I went to the Police Court to examine his depositions, when I found that on oath he had sworn to this statement : — " I DID NOT MAKE A CHARGE AGAINST COLLECTOR OF MURDEEING HIS WIPE, AND I DID NOT ASK " FOE COEONEE'S INQUEST. I DID NOT MAKE ANY CHARGE AGAINST Mr. HILL, COLLECTOR." The following is the charge against Mr. Hill addressed by Jackman to the Secretary of Customs at Wellington : — " Sic,— " Auckland, 21st July, 1888. " I regret very much to have to state that I have found it to be my duty, as a citizen of " this colony, to request a Coroner's inquiry into the death of the late Mrs. Hill, the Collector's "wife, at Chamberlin's Island, last Tuesday. I may state that the officer in whom the inquiry is " placed said to me yesterday that if the facts so far as elicited justify further inquiry it will be " made, and he has, I believe, gone to Chamberlin's Island to-day. It seems almost beyond being " even probable that an inquiry could become necessary into the death of one whose natural protector " had for so many years held the position of Collector of Customs. In part explanation of this I " desire to state that the fact of Mr. Hill having held on to the position is not proof that he has " not deteriorated so as to have fallen below its requirements. " 1 have, &c, " To the Secretary and Inspector of Customs." " S. J. Jackman. " P.S.—The particulars, as on other side are commonly reported, prove to be but too true as " to results : Mr. Hill took Mrs. Hill to Chamberlin's Island, and left her there knowing her to be