CORRESPONDENCE. AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1114, 4 August 1882, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM.

TO THE EDITOE. Sin, —Your leader of Wednesday evening reminds me of the following little story. A scientific society having, after very great labor and deliberation, evolved the following definition: “ Cral> —a little red fish, which walks backward,” submitted the same to an eminent naturalist for his approbation; he replied, “The only emendations which I can suggest are, that the Crab is not a fish, it is not red, and it doesn’t walk backward ; with those slight exceptions your definition is perfect.” As a literary production your leader may be of the highest order of merit; it may be most interesting to many of your readers, it is certainly entertaining to some, and it is obviously a bold piece of writing, but—it is not true. Of course as you were not in the place at the time of the occurrence of the facts which you relate, it is obvious you do not pretend to speak of your own knowledge ; but your informant has shamelessly deceived you. I am far from deprecating your right to go as deeply as you please into the matter; on the contrary, I think you deserve credit for speaking out your opinion, whether correct or erroneous, of the acts of any person in a public capacity; and although your deductions were drawn from the lowest side of human nature, and were anything but com. plimentary to me, yet I oare not how severe the criticism provided it be in the interests of the public, and, as a sin« non, that it be built on a true basis of facts; but you will excuse me if I say that I think, in fairness to me, you’ should first have ascertained the facta, before you at. tempted to lead public opinion on the subject, Your informant says that on the dismissal of the charge I endeavored to influence Sergt. Kidd to institute further proceedings, &c,; the truth is, that within half an hour of the dismissal I went to the R.M.C. for the purpose of myself laying a fresh information, chiefly because there were witnesses for the prosecution who had been subpoenaed and were in attendance at the Court, but whose evidence was refused to be taken; and also because I felt, and still feel, that there had been a miscarriage of justice, in which opinion I am by no means singular; but I met Sergt. Kidd, who restrained me almost by force, saying “ There is no need for you to take any steps, the police are satisfied that a felony has been committed, and will take proceedings; you are requested to desist lest you should militate against our action. It is not your duty, it is our duty, and we will do it.” So that it was not Sergt. Kidd who was led away by my plausible arguments to prosecute (which, indeed, I never asked him to do), as your informant says, but I who was led away by his (no doubt truthfullymade) statements. Your informant then goes on glibly, and relates, without any break, that Kidd had to report to Major Scully, who was sent here to make enquiries. This, again, is a vast departure from the truth, and puts an entirely false aspect on things, and is totally at variance with the papers published. The truth is that Sergt. Kidd, having made his formal report of the offence, was no doubt proceeding to get his evidence together, when various struggles, by threats and otherwise, were made to prevent him in his duty; these failing, other influences, which I have referred to in the first letter of the correspondence, H 81, and the existence of which influences is nowhere denied, were brought to bear, with the result that Kidd was ordered (from Wellington) “ to send the papers, and wait for further instruotionshe sent the papers, and is still waiting those further instruotions. Thus you see how easy it is to interfere with the course of justice without giving an absolute order to desist, and without any particular person taking on his own shoulders the responsibility. So things remained, Sergt. Kidd waiting for the expected further instructions, until whispers got about that someone had promised that he would undertake that nothing further should be heard of the case, and presently the threatened removal of Sergt. Kidd teok place. The whole affair was so obviously an interference with the police in tne execution of their duty that I determined to bring it under the notice of the Minister of Justioe, consequently letter No. 1, Here I state distinctly that your informant either has no acquaintance with the facts, or he wilfully misrepresents, perhaps both, Inspector Scully was not, as he says, deputed to enquire in consequence of Kidd’s report, nothing of the kind, Kidd had long made his report and been interfered with in the mysterious way alluded to, and had long left the district, when the Government, in answer to wires Nog. 4 and 5, agreed to allow the Inspector of the District to report, Tbo In-

spector when here interviewed most of the former witnesses, and about a dozen new witnesses, and was in a position to have made a very reliable report ; what that report was uo one outside the secret service office knows. Now, although I knew perfectly of its existence, I made no applicatiou for it until I received the very extraordinary wire offering me the use of the police, it seemed to me as if they were sincere in that offer it would not be asking too much to have the advantage of the insight into the case which no doubt the Inspector had acquired. But I soon discovered what the “ every assistance by the police ” meant, it meant literally and absolutely nothing more than they would have had to do in any case, viz., the service of subpoenas. So I thanked them for nothing. (To be continued).

[ln publishing a portion of Capt. Tucker’s letter (which will bo concluded in onr next issue), we may make the following remarks. As we said on ft previous occasion, he is more ingenuous than ingenious. His story is lucid and tends to greatly benefit his own side of the question—that is, if it were true!! 1 Capt. Tucker's argument is, to use the simile quoted in his playful little allegory in the first paragraph of his letter, somewhat “ crab ” like! The crab wallc.i sideways ; Capt. Tucker talki sideways! Our words are facts and the result of patient investigation. Capt, Tucker's explanation is, to a very large extent, VlCtion !! I—Ed. P. 8.5.1