The Bean Case.

Manawatu Herald, 5 October 1895, Page 2

The Bean Case.

*r — — . The N.S. Wales liegislftttira tiouncil was crowded on Wednesday afternoon to hear the reply of Sir Juliin Salomons to Mr Meagher. Sir J. Salomons said he would never have undertaken such an unpleasant task but that he felt he could bring home to everyone the 1 absolute truth of his assertions, which he was prepared to swear to in any court. Mr Meagher and Mr : Crick had taken Wrong objection to his keeping the confession sd long secret and not disclosing ife to Mr Pilcher during the sitting* of th 4 Commission, but he had documentary proof that he bad made a statement in writing to Mr Stephen, son of the late Chief Justice, which would bring the conviction of Dean'i guil(j Sto every impartial mind. Notwithstanding Mr Meagher's denial, he would prove that he had- mad* disclosures absolutely involving Dean's guilt, Meagher, Crick, and Dean batched a conspiracy which led to the appointment of > the Commission. He added that after the interview with Mr Meagber at his office he : immediately called in Mr Simpson, solicitor in the same chambers, and gave him full details of the conversation. He asked him to act in the matter, but, owing to their legal relations, he declined. The next day be (Sir .Julian Salomons) saw Mr Stephen, from whom be produced a letter stating that they had several conversations in reference to Mr Meagher's confession. Subsequently Sir Julian Salomons obtained Mr Meagher's consent for ft conference with Mr. Pilcher. The latter agreed, but afterwards wrote saying that as he had acted as Dean's counsel he could not conscientiously take part in the con* ference, adding that whatever state* ments Mr Meagher made were sacred and could not be divulged. Failing to obtain witnesses to substantiate the statement, Sir Julfiin Salomons atf a second interview with Mr Meagher, suggested that he should consult Mr O'Connor, solicitor. Mr Meagher replied that be did not want to consult him, and hoped Sir Julian Salomons would not take any further action. Sir Julian Salomons then tried to impress him with the terrible posi» tion in which , he was placed, and the great wrong done to Mrs Dean, knowing she was innocent. He did all he could to urge Mr Meagher to adopt a proper coarse so as to prevent the terrible disclosures which must inevitably come, but failed, Mv M*»gher only saying that,., he would think, over the matter and ' see "what could be dona. He believed that.if i^ha<|^Qjh£Jfl for Mr Prick, who was <fo uaflfLaapp of the facts, Mr Meagher would have | told the whole truth. Sir Julian Salomons or«aH# Mr I Meagher with concocting a very 1 plausible and able explanation by saying that he was suffering from • | hallucination. Thirty years ago he had suffered from brain fever and had been out of his mind, but since then no one had been able to say | that, he had ever been subject to hallucinations, unless in believing that Mr Meagher was not the i&m he turned out to be. The confession had been made and would have to be cleared up. Mr Meagher must see to it. When Mr Crick and Mr Meagher found that he intended to make the confession known they decided to spread rumours about his hallucinations^ In reference to the alleged; oiforef money to Daan to leave the eounirf, Sir Julian Salomons a'poltir^ ,£wb what he did was to ask Meagjjter^w plead with Dean to go awajf> and leave behind a letter absolving <*hiß wjfe. He added that he would (Ujse £50 out of his own pocket to prove her innocent. Mr Stephen agreed with this, and offered to subscribe money. "" \~. ■-' Between the knowledge of /.ijjfcfj confession and the pledge of confidence which had been given, he was in a state of torture, bat*||&fifc§ to an innocent woman," though against the advice of those most deaf to him, decided him to divulge,! thf whole matter. Mr O'Connor also spoke, an<} confirmed the statement of Sir Julian Salomons that they had talked the confession over and arranged a conference with Mr Meagher, bW«e latter had failed .to attend. He believed every word of Sir Julian Salomons' statement, and that Dean was guilty. It was a cruel -shame to accuse Sir Julian Salomons of halluc ination?. 1 Mr Pilcher said that wha.^ Sic I Julian Salomons had stated "aßouj I the proposed conference he failed to

ifcUttd was correct, but ke Asserted his Belief in Dean's inriocence. , At a late hour the debate was still proceeding. ; "- ?|lch§r : jnid " personally " c wo'uid noTtave Sisolosed confid"etl<seS BUchaiMrMeagherwas alleged to have made. Bach a course was tthwarrant,ea unless to aave an mnoBattt iiian from gdpl «r the scaffqld. - The issue at stake was not whether Dean was guilty or innocent, but whether Mr Meagher said he was. HeTßWttoiouuSir^ownmind that Dean aid not make the 66n* fession attributed to him. After a speech by the attorneygeifcral, Mr Want, tfaVatottW