The Fox Commission

Manawatu Herald, 3 July 1894, Page 3

The Fox Commission

We hope the Government are satisfied with the report of theii Royal Commissioner, a man whe doubted the sworn statements oi two Ministers ! In the Legislative Council on Friday Sir Patrick Buckley, Colonial Secretary, made a statement in laying the report upon the table, from which we extract the following remarks :— His own conconnection with that business might best be ascertained by the evidence he gave before the Commission, and which was now on the table, in which he had said, among other things that he neither directly noi indirectly gave the information referred to in the Commission. (Hear, hear.) That was the evidence he gave, and he stood by it as being absolutely correct and perfectly true. . . . . He was not going to characterise the mode in which that enquiry was conducted, as perhaps it might not be in good taste. He asked the Commissioner to allow him to see the previous evidence which had been given, as he was only anxious that the matter should be investigated to the fullest extent, but the Commissioner refused hia request, and he was therefore unable to ascertain what had been said previously. He was not aware until the publication of the report that he was, in the Commissioner's eyes, the accused. He would ash any impartial man on the evidence to say whether there was one scintilla which would, directly oi indirectly, connect himself or any officer or servant in his department with the publication of that correspondence, and he had no hesitation in saying the answer would be in the negative. Now the sworn testimony of one of his colleagues and himself was that no such informa tion was given either by him ot himself (the Colonial Secretary), which evidence the Commissioner seemed to have absolutely ignored, There were, fortunately for him, in that Council some gentlemen who had known him since he had been in the Colony, and others who were acquaintances of shorter duration, who had never doubted any state ment he had made to them, but it was reserved for a Royal Commissioner to attack not only his word but his sworn testimony without any justification whatever. At the last moment a powerful opponent of the Government, the editor of the Evening Post, had, in the most generous manner, done justice by making a statutory declaration, which he would lay on the table. In it Mi Gillon declared that the information did not reach him in the manner and form, or from any of the persons assumed by the Commissioner, and that neither directly or indirectly were Sir Patrick Buckley, the Hon Mr Cadman, or the messenger referred to concerned or implicated in his obtaining the information regarding the Commandant's letter, (Hear, hear.) On a perusal of that declaration it would be seen that it entirely exonerated him, his. colleague and his messenger from an} such charge as that made by the Commissioner. While he was pleased with the declaration exonerating himself from thut foul accusation, he oould not find language to express how much more pleased he was that an old andfuithfulssrvantwhoseposi tion might have been jeopardised bj that finding, had been exonerated from any complicity in the matter,

That circumstance afforded him extreme pleasure, because while he (Sir Patrick) could possibly have [ defended himself, it might have [ been the cause of much more serious ' consequences to one who would not probably be able to fare so well. Without desiring to question the | good intentions of the Government in appointing the Commission, he hoped the false finding of the Comj missioner, which was entirely unwarranted by the evidence, will \ prove to this or any future Govern- ! ment the necessity for care in the ! selection of officers who had to perform suoh high offioial enquiries, t and not to entrust suoh functions to , incompetent officials.