THE WELLINTON POLICE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5504, 16 November 1878, Page 3

THE WELLINTON POLICE.

THE QUESTION OF KBWABD3—HEGOARTv's CASE. In his evidence before the Gaols Committee, Mr. Boardman complained that in Heggarty's case the insurance agents had made a payment of £4O to Inspector Atchison, to be distributed among3t the police in consideration of their services in getting a conviction. After giving evidence as to subscription of the money by the insurance companies, Mr. Boardman is asked:—

Do you know how tho money was distributed?—l have tried to get Inspector Atchison to distribute it, but I have not been able to do so.

What ha 3 become of the money ?—I suppose Atchison has kept it himsolf. In last February he had not distributed it; at least ho told me he had not. I tried to get him to pay it over to the police, whom I consider he is depriving of it; and be has never told me ho has paid it. The Only reason I could got why it was not divided amongst the police was that he was making inquiries to see who was the most deserving, but that was four months after Heggarty had been eonvfeted. Mr. flarfon,] Whom was the £4O to be divided amongst ? Do you remember the names of the police? —Connor (who arrested Heggarty), llyrne, and Farrell, perhaps, but Ido not know. I think it was left to the discretion of Inspector Atchison to divide the money amongst the people who were best entitled to it, but it was not intended he should keep it all. Still I think something was said by Mr. Wallace to the effect that he should give wh t he thought flt to these men, and keep the rest himself.

Inspector Atchison was called to answer this very grave charge, and his examination on this point is as follows : Has any money been paid to you by the insurance companies as stated ?—Forty pounds was paid -on account of Hoggarty's c .so.

By whom I—Bj Mr. Wallace. How did that come to be paid?—l had been to a good deal of exponse in going to the Wairarapa, and keeping witnesses in town. Your expenses, when incurred on the public service, are paid by the Government f—No; thoy were not.

Why not?—T never sent any bill in. Why not ?--I did not know they would be paid. Is it not the rale that any ouicor travelling "n tho public service gets his expenses ?—I have not had any for years.

Yon have travelled frequently ?—Yos. And have you paid your own expenses?—Up to the time Mr. Bunny came into office we never received any travelling expenses. . Is there not a rule that travelling expenses are to be paid by the Government?—Yes; now there i-. Have you not drawn your espenses ? —Yes, when I went to Wanganul. Well, why d d you not draw them in this case ?—I was not aware I could then.

How was this £4O disbursed ?—ln this way: O'Connor had £lO, and Fraser had £5. What had he to do with the matter? —He assisted mo in getting hold of a man who waa in Heggarty's employ. Ho was the man to whom Ueggarty suggested that the place should be set on firo. • Well, that onfy accounts for £ls?—On this man of whom I have spoken (GordOD) I spent £8 or £lo.' Tho letter written to me said I was to übo discretion.

Was the detective paid any thing?— *o; ho did nothing. I found tho man Heggarty was going away, and I wont down to tho wharf, as several steamers were about leaving Wellington. lew Captain Un-' derwood, of the Arawata. and pointed out Heggarty to him, and told him what I thought ho was going to do. Isaid, "keepyoureyoonhim; and, if hßshould go "board your vessel, just heuvc-to in ihe bay, and I will come off iu a boat and take him off." I thon went and consultetl-Mr. Bell, the Crown Prosecutor, and he told me the best thing I could do was to arrest the man on a charge of perjury. lat once had hlitt charged with perjury, in having sworn .falsely against this man Gordon, who had in consequence been convicted, but who was subsequently released from gaol on a pardon. Heggarty was arrested, and brought up next day, and remanded to the Wairarapa. Farrell had nothing to do with the matter, beyond that ho went with Hmith to arrest him.

Then you say you gave £ls to O'Connor and Frasor, and the rest of the nionoy wont to pay eipenaea ? Y«3. Mr. Bruce Wallace was called, and said although when ho gave the money to Atchison to distribute he meutioned names, ho did so merely upon hearsay as to who deserved money. Ho did not intend to direct the Inspector as.to who the money should go to. Ho gave the money for those who deserved it, and left it entirely to the Inspector to decido upon the point. Had never complained. Mr. Boardman had said something about tho money not having been distributed, but witness did not trouble himself about it.

Major Atkinson.] "Wero you satisfied with the distribution of tho £4O ? Had you any reason to bo dissatisfied with It f~Well. although I mentioned tho name* ol O'Connor, Farrell, and Byrne to receive portion -n! tho money at Atchison's discretion, I novor heard from Byrne or O'Connor whether they rccolved tho money or not. In fact, I did not trouble my head about it. But X heard from Boardman that Farrell eaid ho had not received any money, yet I did not attach much Importance to It. Thcso things are apt to go out of obo's head. I did not attach suiQclont Imnortance to it to say anything to Atchison about It. Tho view I took waa this: Although I had montioned theso names. It was merely becauso I thought they hod something to do with tho matter, and ft struck mo that perhaps FarreH had not had so much to do with the matter, and that only Atchison and tho officers had any claim. If you know as a matter of fact that Farrell had not got any money, would you bo content?—Not It it was put to mo this way, that Farroll was deserting of

something and got nothing; hut If Inspector Atchison gave rae an explanation, which he has nut done yet, that Farrell was not entitled to any. then I should not grumble. Ida not "know what view Inspector Atchison entertains on the subject. the point I waut to get at is this : Did you leave it to his discretion ?—Yes.

The evidence given by Inspector Atchison as to Farrell not having done anything in Heggarty's case to entitle him to a reward, led to a rejoinder by Farrell, in which he stated—

Atchison said he pointed out Heggarty to mo. To show that that iwiot correct, I may say that, in order to make sure of" the thing, I looked up the records and I found that upon tho sth of February, 1877, I arrested a man named Gordon on a charge of stealing Heggarty's horses. Gordon was prosecuted at tho Court the following sessions, and convicted : so that I must have known Heggarty then, because I worked up the ca3o, and appeared in Court at tho same time as Heggarty did, to give evidence. I knew Heggarty before tho date of Gordon's arrest. I know him personally before that, so that It was not necessary for Inspector Atchison to point him out to mo. I also wish to state that Hegg.irty was not arrestee! on tho jetty at all. but was arrested near Mr. Allan's office, near the Odd Fellows' Ilall I saw him and lus brother in Mr. Allan's office, and waited till they came out, when I arrested him. Inspector Atchison was not present.- Atchison did not know he was in town till I told him near the Empire notol, that Heggarty had come to totrn, and that I believo.l he had comedown so as to get awny in one or other of the Melbourne or Sydney steamers, in order to evade justice. He then told me to arrest him, and I did so. I would respectfully submit the regulations, to show what is the rule as to rewards You will see by Oils rule (rule 60 read) that Inspector Atchison had no right to retain a penny of tho £4O. Although I may have had no claim, still Atchison hid no claim, and had no right to keep one farthing. On being recalled, Inspector Atchison dotailed at great length the circumstances attending the arrest of Heggarty, to show that Farrell had little or nothing to do with preventing him leaving the colony.

Sergeant Price examined. Inspector Atchison] Do you remember coming up to my house during tne month of June or July, in 1577, in respect to Heggarty's case I— lt was in September. Oh. September, Was it? What time in the inorninff did vou come ? Between 2 and 3 ; about half-past 2,1 should think. You woke me up f—Yes. What did you tellme ?—I said I had seen Heggarty and his son and son-in law in town, knew where they were staying; and, seeing that he was under committal, I wanted to know wjrat I should do. Do you remember, the following morning, being on the beach with Farrell ?—Yes. Did he ask you to point out Heggarty to him :—Ho did tot directly ask me, but he wanted to know what sort of a man ho was. I said, " Fou ought to know him, but, if you don't, I will point hira out to you." Did you point him out ?--I did : ho was standing sideways to us, near the Odd Fellows' Hall, in company witli his son and son-in-law. Sergeant Smith, being duly sworn, was examined. Inspector Atchison.] Do you remember the arrost of Feggarty ?—I was not present when he was arrested, recollect your calling me to where yon and Farrell were standing—l was a stranger in Wellington then —and saying, ' Smith, will you ace mpany Farrell to the wharf. I shall be down thore directly, and will point him out to you." • Did you go down to the wharf ?—Yes. With Farrell ?—Yes, and you followed immediately afterwards. Did I point out Heggarty to you and Farrell I —You did. Did Farrell recognise Heggarty until I pointed him out ?—Well, we had been on the wharf ten minutes lo -king for him, and had not found him. Heggarty was on the wharf ?—Yea ; the man whom you pointe ' out as Hesgerty was there all the time. Had Farrell any idea of Heggarty until ho was pointed out by me?—i am quite certain if Farrell had known H gga-ty tie would have pointod him out to me before you came down. The same man as you pointed out had on some timber on the wiiari between his son and son-iu-law, and we were all tho time looking for Heggarty. Mr.-Wallace, in further evidence, mentioned that in the case of Pestridge a sum of £lO had been given to Farrell for his own use. Detective Faruell. The Chairman 1 Wo wish to question you about evidence «iven here diving the last day or two. Have you ever received payments or rewards directly, I mean not through the Inspector?—l have, on one occasion. Wliat was that?—After I had done making inquiries into Pestridge's case I made a full report to the Inspector. I gave it to him in the Empire Hotel, and gave a copy to Mr. Wallace. Mr. Wa lace gave rae a letter. I opened it, and found it contained > cheque for £lO for myself in consequence of the trouble I had taken, and to defray the expens S I had incmred. I told Mr. Wallace that'it only cist me £1 altogether; that I was not allowed to take these moneys: and that, if he wished to give money he must send it to the Inspector, lie would not send it to the Inspector, and I kept the cheque. Whi did you not mention that to tho committee when you were g ving evidence on the subject of payment ?—You did not ask me about it. MESSRS. DDNOAK AND MILLS' CASES. Mr. Barton next brought forward a charge that money had been sent to the Inspector by Mr. R. J. Duncan and Mr. E. W. Mills, for distribution to police officers who on various occasions had found their respective places of business accidentally open at night, and had taken care of them till tho morning. Inspector Atchison denied he had ever received money from either gentleman, aud both Mr. Duncan and Mr. Mills stated positively that they had Dever seut money in any shape to the Inspector or any other officer of tbe police.