The Departmental Enquiry.

Manawatu Herald, 16 December 1893, Page 2

The Departmental Enquiry.

# On 'I hursday afternoon the Reeident Magistrate held an enquiry into the truth of certain charges made by Ml- Robert Austin, chairman of the Licensing Committee against Constable Gillespie. The enquiry was not open to the public but all the members of the Committee and the Town Clerk were invited to be present, and attended. Since August it appears that Mr Austin has been addressing complaints to the police department against the constable, which the department, after hearing the constable's explanation, have replied satisfactorily lo the constable. As these letters became continuous Constable Gillespie aslwd that an enquiry might be held to determine what grounds Mr Austin had for his complaints. This was granted and Mr Brabant, R.M., was authorised to hold it. On the charges being defined on Thursday a new and last letter signed by Robert Austin as chairman of the Licensing Committee was made public, a letter which the constable had never seen. It contained most serious charges and occupied some five sheets of paper. Mr Austin failed to substantiate a single charge and though he had written that the letter had been sent at the request of a number of people, failed to give any name but that of Thomas Keegau. Keogan when called admitted that he had written half the letter in Mr Austin's house. He was however unable to substantiate the charges he had written, but on the contrary styled the constable the best friend he had in the town. The Committee testified that the letter had been sent without their authority or knowledge and they dissented from it. Witness called, spoke most highly of the manner the constable performed his duties, and after Mr Williams had given his evidence to this cliect and Mr Austin was asked if he had any questions to put, replied, that he entirely agreed with every word Mr Williams had said and so would every person in the town ! The Magistrate was naturally exceedingly astonished and wanted to know then why the letter had been written, lie got no satisfactory reply, We do not know for certain what the report will be, but it is easy to imagine. A man who lays most serious charges against another, urging his removal from the town, yet whan called upon to prove his statemunts fails in every point, cannot be said to have come out in satisfactory colours. Such men are dangerous to a neighbourhood and it is most probab'e otlm 1 proceedings will follow.