Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MEIKLE COMMISSION.

(Fee Press Aiaociatlon.) Dunedin, last night. The evidanco for the suppliant beforo the Meikle Commission concluded this forenoon Novi! Sutherland, an old ago pensioner, stated that Cameron told him in 1894 the company wanted to get Meikle off the laud, as ho was a sheep-stealer, and that he had omployod a ooitain per-* sod, whose name would not be mentioned, to inks a trap for Meikle. Dr Findlay said this evidence cams to him as a complete surprise. It would be necessary to obtain a commission (o secure the evidence of Cameron, who was at present in England, and would not bo returning to the colony. With an intimation that Mrs Meikle was too ill to givo evidence to day, and that it might be necessary to oall ber lat6r od, suppliant’s oase closed. Dr Findlay then opeued the defenoe.

DR. FINDLAY'S ADDRESS,

LAMBERT’S RELATION TO THE CASE.

(Pee Press Association.) Duuedin, last night.

Later.—The Commission continued its sittings to-day, when Dr. Findlay opened his caße. Qe gave an outline of the whole case, contending that Me'kle had no claim whatever on the colony, the prosecution being started by the Company, and Meikle being convicted on the evidence of the Cunpany’d witnesses.

He then want on to show that the s'ories toM now wore inconsistent with matters at the time of the trial, ridiculing the sia'oment that Lambert had said ho was going to put skins on Meikle’s land. It would have been oasy to have poinled out at the time that it was Lambert’s work, but instead ihe plea was put forward that the skins must have been taken off the fence by misti k \ He went on fo contend that Lambert’s oonviction for perjury did not prove Meikle’s innocence. It did net do away with 27 sheep being found on Meikle’s property, or with two skins with the Company’s brand in Msikle’s smithy. Although it was not his main purpose, he believed he would satisfy the Commission , that Lambert-was innocent of pe-jury, which be hid been convioted, Lsmbait had fixod the night on which he bad seen young Meikle drive the sheep by his having visited a person named Gregg. That n'ght be the ls>h instead of the 17th Ootobe-. A had come to light since showing that fyloGeorgp, wjth whom Lambert was living on tho station, bad loft on the 18 h, instead of the 17th October. I that oeuld have been produced at Lambert's trial ho (oounsel) was oonfidem Lambert would not have been convioted

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GIST19060509.2.10

Bibliographic details

Gisborne Times, Volume XXII, Issue 1744, 9 May 1906, Page 2

Word Count
421

MEIKLE COMMISSION. Gisborne Times, Volume XXII, Issue 1744, 9 May 1906, Page 2

MEIKLE COMMISSION. Gisborne Times, Volume XXII, Issue 1744, 9 May 1906, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert