RESIDENT MAGISTEATE'S COURT.-Yesterday.

Thames Advertiser, Volume VII, Issue 1868, 3 October 1874, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTEATE'S COURT.-Yesterday.

(Before W. Phaser, Esq., U.JI.) Judgment fob Plaintiff.—Joseph Ardern v. J. Wilson, claim £3 108, balance of account. F. Weils v, G. Dalziel.—This was a claim for £2 0s Id, freight. On the application of Mr Miller, the case wa3 adjourned for a week. ■fc, ELIS r t J *' Mobton.—Claim £1 goods supplied. Adjourned for a week. GeOBGE fIULJIE V. WIBEMU Te HuU. —Claim £3 ss. Defendant confessed the debt, and judgment was given for the amount claimed with costs, 9s.

THAMES GOLDFIELD HOSPITAL. A 'meeting of the members of the Thames Goldfiold Hospital was held last evening, at the Salutation Hotel, Marystreet, for the purpose of continuing investigation into the case of Maurice Power,, and also whether the report of the sub'committee which had sat was as stated in a letter signed by Dr. Lethbridge, Dr. Payne, Dr. Rigour, Mr Aitken, and tho wardsmen of tho Hospital. The primary business of the meeting was to investigate the charge of tampering which tho Hev, J. Hill made several weeks ago against Mr Tyler, and which Mr Hill has kept hanging over him since that lime. Dr, Lethbridge's letter contained the following statement:— '

As I have no hesitation in saying that the said report has been arrived at as much by suppression of what is true, as by suggestion of what is false, 1 would, not only in justice to myself but to the others I have alluded to, request the public to suspend their judgment until those persons who now complain of the wav in which their testimony has been distorted have had an opportunity of correcting that evidence, and those against whom charges have been brought have had an opportunity of refuting them.

The letter of the other witnesses said:—

We Lave no hesitation in stating, from what we know, and from what wo have beard, that the evidence as set foith in tint report is both incorrect, incomplete, and calculated to convey false and erroneous impressions; and, moreover, that the report does not produce material evidence given before the subcommittee pointing to conclusions contrary to some of those contained in the report. We also desire to state that we are of opinion that the inquiry leading to the report was not conducted in a manner just and fair to the officers of the Hospital, inasmuch as a person not a member of the sub committee, was permitted to conduct a quasi-prosecntion, on serious charges, against the officers, without them or any of them being informed of those charges, or being permitted to be present during the inquiry to defend themselves, although one principally concerned had applied for such permission.

The members of committee present were:—Mr Rowe (in the chair), Eev. V. Lush, Eev. J. Hill, He v. Father Lonergan, Messrs Tyler, Cox, Frater, Gudgeon, Macnab, Sims, •Mcllhone, Wilkinson, Kenshaw, Souter, Power, Day, Hudson, McDonald, McCullough, Bagnall. The Secretary read a letter from Miss Milgrew, the witness whom Mr Tyler was charged with tampering with: "It was my intention to come to nest committee meeting in accordance with Mr Hill's request, but from the report of last evening's proceedings, I do not think I would be justified in placing myself in such a position. That the truth of the matter may be known, I have made a statement in the presence of a Justice of the Peace, and beg to hand it to you." Eev. Father Loneegan proposed that the statement be read. At the request of Mr Sins, a previous letter written by Miss Milgrew to the committee was read. Mr Mcllhone seconded the motion that the statement be read. He said he did not know what was in it. Mr Sims said ho did not know whether they would be justified in receiving this statement. Miss Milgrew ought to have been authorised by the committee to have made a statement before a justice of the peace before they could receive it. It had been held out that Miss Milgrew would have been present to make a statement, and of course it was supposed that Mr Tyler would be present to ask her any question. Mr Hill said he had reason to believe that he would get her there for that purpose. Eev. J. Hill: That is so. Mr Sims : And now when Miss Milgrew had been, he might say, packed off, they would have a statement before a magistrate. Mr Mcllhone whom ? Mr Sins wouranot say by whom. Now Miss Milgrew had made a statement, and was it to be received by that meeting before Mr Tyler's fiat denial P He begged to move that the statement be not read. Eev. V. Lush seconded the motion. He considered that they had not acted fairly to Mr Tyler. Mr Hill had repeatedly told them 'that he had a prospect of her coming here, and at last meeting he said distinctly that she would be here on this evening. Eev. J. Hill : I said I had reason to believe she would be here.

Kev. Y.Lush: It would be a very different thing for Miss .Vlilgrew to make a statement in the presence of Mr Tyler, when be could cross-question her, and could object to any wrong statement. I consider now that Mr Hill, if an honourable gentleman —

(Mr Mcllhone here interrupted Mr Lush. That gentleman remarked that he often asked himself the question who was president of that committee, Mr Eowe or Mr Mcllhone.)

Eev. Mr Lush then resumed: What I was saying was, that as Mr Hill had failed to bring Miss Milgrew here to make her own statement—if Mr Hill would say, as I have failed to bring Miss Milgrew here, I now withdraw the charge I made against Mr Tyler. This proceeding was placing him at a great disadvantage, at a most unfair disadvantage. Ido not wish to obstruct the business. I want the inquiry to bo gone on with to ascertain if any of the officers have been guilty of neglect. But do not let us go on with this business as if we were determined that some one shall be found guilty.

Mr Tylee : There is now a motion and amendment beforo the meeting. It so happens that I know something about the latest phase of this affair—that statement.

Mr'Molmone: I do not know what tno statement is, vltu K t n^: Wo cannofc have any remarks about the statement unless it is

oi 1 ?? 11 .: Thero aro r °ason ß why it should not be read, which ought to be uponthscomrmttee. I shall notex cis the atement has been got u P( and ask whether a satement so got up ought to be imived by a comniitteo of honorable gentlemen. At half-past twelve o'clock to-day I paid Miss Milgrew off, havine from circumstances which had arisen given her notice to leave last Friday' Knowing that when she did leave mo she might be subject to influences which were not creditable

Mr Mcllhone : What has this to do with it?

The Chairman : Nothing. Mr Mclluone : The subject we havo come to inquire about is how Powor was treated. What havo wo got to do with whether Mr Tyler gave his servant notice or not ?

The Chairman, on being appealed to as to whether Mr Tyler should bo continually interrupted, said that personally he thought Mr Tyler had a perfect right to assign any reasons against the reooptiou of that statement. '

Mr Tyiee : That is what I was about to do, and what I must do. This is a matter that affects me, and in common decency I ought to be allowed to speak upon it, if this statement is to be read as against me. In the course of the conversation I pressed vjpon her to coino here, and I had a person who look down in shorthand the conversation, which I now place before the committee. When that statement is read, you will see that the girl then stated that I had not attempted to tamper with her, that she never thought so, and that she had never told anyone so, but refuses to come because of what someone bad told her as to what I had said. I pressed her to come, and said that it was unfair to me not to come, but she declined. In the afternoon a person informed me that she had made a declaration on the subject before the Mayor. I went to Mr Davies, and to my intense disgust he informed me thatMrHillhadcometohimandaskedhim to take a declaration; that Mr Hill then produced a declaration out of his pocket, and said that Miss Milgrew would shortly be there. Mr Mollhone was there. She made this statement under those circumstances. I had no notice of it. Noono said a word to me about it, and I think, in common fairness, if that statement was to be used against me, I ought to have been told of it, so that I could have asked her any question I might have thought desirable. I say that a statement got up like that, by two members of committee who have occupied such a prominent position in one direction, is worthless. These two persons, who have acaused me of this offence, actually take this girl secretly, unknown to, anybody, and prepare a statement for ■ her to make. It was in Mr Hill's possession, and ho read it over to her, and then she signed it. I say that such a statement as that, if recorded as evidence-—

Mr MdLHONE again interrupted Mr Tyler, and Mr Sims appealed to the chairman to cause him to keep order.

Mr Tylee : I really don't mind Mr Mcllhone; I shall speak as I wish to speak, irrespective of him. This statement is now asked to be made use of as against me. Mr Mcllhone : The statemont may bo against me for all I know. Mr Tylee here spoke to the chairman about how Mr Mcllhone had been allowed to interrupt him a dozeu times. The chairman ought to do his duty irrespective of persons. He resumed: I do not wish to influence tho gentlemen present as to the reception of this statement, but to ask whether it is a proper document to bo used as against any person. The usual practice in Courts is, that nothing can be used against a person unless ho is confronted. This statoment is not upon oath, and is merely a declaration before a person who happens to be a justice of the peace. Mr Davies might have administered an oath, and I do not know why ho did not, Another element in it is, that if any person is charged with au offence, any person giving evidence against him should be confronted by tho person charged, and he should have au opportunity of cross-examining the evidence given against him. The statement, so far as I am concerned, may be read, but I wish to point out that it was made under such abominable circumstances as these.

Eev. J. Hill : In answer to Mr Tyler it is requisite for me to make an explanation as to how the statement was got up. I believe that Miss Milgresv would have been here, but on reading an account of the proceedings, she hesitated more than ever to come into our midst, end thought that she could not come here in justice to herself. I asked her either to come or make a statement which would beequaltoher presence. Sheexprossedher willingness to come before any justice ofthe peace, and sign a declaration as to what hau taken place between Mr Tyler and herself with regard to the evidence given beforo the sub-committee. Before this, I had taken down from her own lips a statement of what had taken place at that interview. Not only had I taken it down, but I read it to her twice beforo our last meeting. She said if I would carefully prepare that statemont, and lee ber carefully look over it, she was quite willing to go before any justice of the peace and sign it. I read the statoment over to her on the evening before our last meeting I thiuk, and she said it was correct. I said, " Well, in order to make the matter sure, would you go to the meeting and read it." She told me she was leaving tlie Thames on Saturday. She came to me to-day at two o'clock, and said she was going to-day. I said, "Why not wait till Saturday?" when she said she had made up her mind to go to-day, I said, I must then get your statement, when she said she was willing to go before any justice. I then asked her to sit down, and I read the statement to her again. She made one slight alteration, I tliink, of two words, not affecting the sense, I went to Mr Davis, and told him my errand. Miss Milgrew had been there, and in a short time she came back, when the statement was read over to her, and Mr Davis said, " Do you make this entirely of your own will ?" and she said she did. I The statement was again read to her, and she said it was ~ perfectly correct. Mr Davies said, " Will it be necessary to swear her P" and I said, " Yes, by all means." Mr Davies said it was not necessary, that it was quite enough to be signed in his presence as a justice. I said that I wanted a statement that would staud the test of any investigation, and Mr Davies said it was quite enough for the document to bo signed before him. I that there was nothing dishonourable in the way of getting up the document. I am not to blame for Miss Milgrew not being here. I took the statement down from her own words, and again, and again, and again, I think five times, it was read to her, to see that thcro was no mistake That is her solemn declaration, and as to whether it tallies with the statement put on tho table by Mr Tyler I do not know. It was honestly prepared, truthfully prepared, and solemuly signed.

Mr E. H. Poweb stated, as a matter of law, that a declaration so rnado was equivalent to having been made on oath. He did not think Mr Tyler could take exception to that.

(We are sorry that want of space prevents us from giving Mr Power's legal opinions and arguments.)

Mr Bagnall said that at last meetiug he understood Mr Hill to say that ho had reason to believe that Miss Milgrew would be thero that night. He now understood him to say that this statement was prepared by him before the last meeting.

Eev.J. Hill said he had the statement in black and white, not for the purpose of bringing it hero, but that he might know what had takon place.

Mr Bagnail said that Mr Hill had informed them that he had written it out, and read it to her' four or five times.

That bore evidence that it was tho same statement,

Eev. J. Hill: It was the same state, ment.

Mr Bagnall thought it curious, if this statement was taken down before last meeting, that Mr Hill should have told them that he had reason to believe she would be there to be examined upon the charge of tampering, and yet should have had her statement written down.

Eev. J. Hill said that he had taken down the interview ho had with Miss Milgiw. He did not take it with the intention of it coming before them in the shape it had done that night. Ho had full confidence she would have been there that night, Mr Bagnall said that for his part he should be glad to hear the statement read, and he thought it would bo just as well to proceed and read it. Mr Kenshaw said there was another way they must look at it, namely, how were they to get through the business if they received tho statement from a person who was not there, and who could not be cross-examined. He presumed tho statement wns in support of tho position Mr Hill had taken up, or that Mr Hill would withdraw the charge he had made. Then they must expect that the statement would bo contradicted, and then they would have another declaration, and they would never got to an end. If she had been here, it would have been right, but in her absence, ho thought this earnest desire to convict Mr Tylor should not be shown.

Ms Wilkinson opposed the reading of the document, saying that Mr Tyler was in Grahamstown, and might have been obtained, when Miss Milgrow had been making the declaration. Nev. J. Him said he would bo the last man in the world to inflict an injury upon any man. Ho had simply taken this course in order to place himself in a right position before tho committee and the community. As Mr Eonshaw had said, it was supposed that tho statement somewhat bore him out. At tho samo time ho had no desiro to inflict an injury on Mr Tyler, as ho would bo tho last man to do such a thing, and ho did not know whether tho committee would read tho statement or not.

Mr Gudgeon thought' tho two statements should bo withdrawn, and tho business proceeded with.

Mr Tyler said the statements made in the discussion had been such that it would injure him now if tho statement wore not read, as it would appear that thero was something in tho statement calculated to affect him, and ho did not wish to be put in that position. His only object had been to show how it had been prepared—how it had been got up, If read, it could only bo used for what it was worth.

Mr MoTleone and Eev. Father Loneegan contended that tho statement should be read.

The Chairman said he thought the statement (which ho held in his hand) should not be read. It would be followed by another statement, and the result would be certainly not to advance tho business. He hoped that this was to bo the last meeting on the subject. Ho thought that such a spirit and feeling had beon excited which, in his opinion, made it certain that they would not bring out the truth in that form which would bo satisfactory to the public. He thought therefore the better course would be to ask tho Government itself to institute an impartial inquiry into the matter.

Mr Tn.EE said that he should do nothing in the way of the inquiry being made, and any course adopted that would restore harmony and good feeliug. He was, however, charged with an offence, and he thought that,charge ought to bo proceeded with or should be withdrawn. The matter ought not to be ended leaving him in the position of such a chargo having been made against him. He thought it was only fair lo him that the chargo which had boon made against him by Mr Hill should either be proceeded with or should be withdrawn.

Kov. J. Hill said ho had acted ia this matter conscientiously, although improper motives had been attributed to him. He thought it right at the present stage to withdraw what he had stated in regard to Mr Tyler. This seemed to be now tho only thing lying in the way of a right settlement. He thought it his duty to withdraw tho matter, which he now did. MrPowia begged to propose that Mr Hill's withdrawal bo sanctioned by the committflo. l{ev. J. Him said ho simply took this ground'in order to facilitate the business. .Rev, Father Lonekgan expressed his' strong disapproval of Mr Tyler's conduct in having what Miss Milgrew said taken down. It was the same as was dono by Henry Parkes in O'JParrell's case in Sydney. llev J. Hill said that if he had known that Miss Milgrew's statement was taken down unknown to her, he would not have taken the step he had done in withdrawing. A division was then taken, when seven voted that the statement should not be read, and ten that it should be road. The statement was then road, as follows:—

" Shortland, 2nd October, 1874,

" This is my statement regarding the matter for which my presence was wanted at the Hospital Committee:-On the evening of the day on which I attended the meeting of the sub-committee, Mr Tyler, in allusion to my evidence, of which he had heard, said, ' They will set you down as an enemy to tho Hospital.' On the evening before the letter from the doctors and the wardsmen appeared in the newspaper, Mr Tyler was in tho din-ing-room. He had a book; I think it was square, and not very thick. It was not a printed book; but there were pieces of newspaper pasted in it, near which was somo writing. He said ho wished to know if tho report of my evidence which had been given was correct. Ho then read out of tho book my statements separately, and asked mo if I had said so. When I said that I had stated that I was frequently with Power from half to threequarters of an hour and had never seen any warder or patient with him, Mr Tyler said, ' And do you know that tho reason was that through kindness, tho nurses did not like to intrude?' When Mr Tyler asked mo if L had said that I had seen Power let thd arm drop on the floor several times, I replied that Iwas sure my statement' to the committee Was that I had seen it twice. When ho had gone over all my evidence, and I had said that it was correct, Mr Tyler said, 'It is very strange that tho doctors and tho wardsmen should all sny that their ovidenco is incorrectly given, and that you should say that yours is correctly given.' X roplied that it was correctly given, with that one exception about tho twice. Mr Tyler then said, 1 It is also very strango that tho people at tho Hospital should contradict your statements, and you should say that they are true,' I then replied: *JNqt only m

my statements correct, but had my memory been as good then as now, I would have remembered more.—Maey Milgbew."—Signed and declared before me this second day of October, 1874, at Grahamslown, W. Davies, J.P. : During the reading of the statement, a smile gathered on the faces of some of the members of the committee, apparently at the idea that this should have been the basis of the serious charge of tampering. Mr Ebnshaw: Well, this is a mare's nest. Mr Biais :Is this the document which has been hanging over Mr Tyler as a charge of tampering? Mr Tyler said if this was to be used against him, he had something to say in tho way of evidence, not in the way of discussing the charge of tampering with the witness, which had been made against him. The Chaibman said they were not in a position to deal with any charge. There had never beon a charge formally before it. Mr Wilkinson said a charge had been made against Mr Tyler. Mr Hill said he withdrew it. and then said he declined to withdraw it. Eev. J. Hill : I said I should not have taken the step I did. Mr Eenshaw said he understood Mr Hill to mean from the position of having withdrawn the charge. Eev. J. Hul: No. MrMACNAB said he should like to hear the statement read again. Mr Renshaiv said the affair was like a bubble which had burst. Eev. J. Hill said he could enter into that statement, and point out elements in it, but he did not think it necessary. He would simply withdraw the statement he had made regarding a member of the sub-committee on a previous occasion. Mr Sms: You moan that you apologise to Mr Hill. Mr Mollhone : No, not in the presence of that statement. Mr Wilkinson moved that Mr Hill's wirhdrawal be accepted. Eev. Y. Lush said Mr Hill must have known the substanoe of that letter for a long time. Eev. J. Hill : I withdraw the statement. Mr Benshaw said he felt very strongly aftor the letter that this was a mountain in labour which had brought forth a mouse. Ho would move, " That, in the opinion of this meeting,' the contents of tho statement showed that it was very injudicious to found a charge of tampering on such meagre grounds." The charge of tampering had a very serious sound about it—it was a very awkward charge to have hanging over a person—and no one ought to mako it unless he had some foundation for it. Taking the most serious construction they could possibly put upon that document, it did not amount to much more than conversations which ho had no doubt all of them had had on this subject with those who had been examined, and if this were sufficient, he felt that a charge of tampering might be made against every member of the sub-committee. He certainly thought this charge would have been something moro serious, but all that was alleged appeared to have been a mere ordinary expression. Mr Hill had said that if the charge could be proved the member against whom the charge was made would not be a suitable person to sit in judgment. He felt disappointed that the grounds were so slight, and he thought that the general charge of mismanagement when sifted .would amount to about as much of an airy bubble as this had done.

lie v. V. Lush seconded Mr Renshaw's motion.

Mr Wilkinson said he would withdraw tho resolution ho proposed in favour of this motion.

Mr Fiuteb said he thought there had beenacertaiu amount of ground at least for the charge of tampering. He would propose as an amendment, " That this meeting expresses its disapprobation of the conduct of Mr Tyler with regard to Miss Milgrew, and is strongly of opinion that his conduct throughout the whole proceeding has been highly reprehensible and injurious to the interests of the Thames Hospital."

Bev. Father Loneeg-an seconded the motion, again mentioning Mr Henry Purkes and the O'Farrell case.

Mr Sims said that Mr Tyler had only acted as any man might be expected to act against whom a serious charge had been brought. Ho thought none of the members would hesitate to say that a very grave charge had been hanging over him, and a charge which proved to be a mere conversation. There was nothing in Miss Milgrew's letter to show that Mr Tyler had endeavoured to induce Miss Milgrew in any way to alter the evidence she had given. Mr Hill had read that over to the girl five times, and how the contents could be oonstrued into anything like tampering it passed his mind to imagine. That statement would be published, and the public would judge as to whether Mr Tyler had been tampering with the girl. As Mr ilenshaw had said, the bubble had burst. He really thought that Mr Hill would hav'e brought forward somo statement that Mr Tyler had tried to get the girl to sajy something contrary to tho truth.

Mr Tyleb then addressed the committee at some length, pointing out that he had not taken any part in the investigation, and that what he had said had only been in connection with the serious charge which hail been made against him, and which he knew in his own mind to be most unjust. There were one or two inaccuracies in the statement which he would correct. It said that he spoke to Miss Milgrew on the evening of the day on which she had given evidence. Now he had no idea of what Miss Milgrew's evidence was until it appeared in tho report. When he spoke to her about her evidence ho had no book, but the newspaper. The book referred to ho had with him, and he had not bought it until two days before the Wednesday on which the committee met. Mr Tyler, after somo further remarks, read somo sentences of the conversation between Miss Milgrew and himself that day as follows: —" What reason had Mr Hill for saying that you would be there to-night?' Mr Hill and Mr Mcllhono both say they have reason to believe you will be there to-night, and they say that I tampered with you.—Answer: 1 never said such a thing, aud never thought such a thing, and if they choose to say so, I can't help it." Mr Tyler went on to point out that all ho was alleged to have said to the girl had been said before there was any idea that there would bo another investigation. As to the amendment, ho had simply de.fonded himsolf. Mr Tyler read Mr Hill's remarks when ho first made the charge, and stated that upon that a resolution was passed that no business be transacted tdl Miss Milgrew had beon examined. So serious did the : committee think the charge of tampering, that they passed that resolution which still stood on the miuutos, although the committer had gone on with the business.

Rev, J. Him said there was no charga made.

After some further discussion, Mr Cox said he hoped Mr Eenshaw would withdraw his amendment, and allow Mr Hill's withdrawal of the oharge to remain as it was. Eev. J. Hill made a statement, saying that he had acted entirely on his own accord, and not at Mr Mcllhone's suggestion. His first information was from a member of the committee, not Mr Mcllhone, and his second information was from two parties not connected with the committee at all.. Mr Eenshaw and Mr Prater then withdrew the motion and amendment. Some discussion then took place as to whether it should be put that Mr Hill had withdrawn his" statement" or withdrawn his charge. Mr Him said he withdrew the statement he made regarding a member of the committeo. He had not accused any member of the committee. lie said he wished to know whether such had:.taken place, as was reported, and he now withdrew that statement. The Chairman said he would put his " statement." The motion that Mr Hill's " statement" should be withdrawn, and his statement accepted was then put and carried unanimously. Kev. J. Him then moved, " That, in the opinion of this committee, it is desirable that the Provincial Government be requested to cause inquiry to be made into the manner in which Maurice Power was treated in the Thames Hospital, and to ascertain if the manner in which he was treated could in any way have led to the disastrous result of the loss of his Mr Hill made a lengthy statement in defence of the action of the subcommittee to the effect that it was not their place to make a charge, but to investigate and report to the sub-com-mittee. He also asserted that he had gone into the inquiry quite unbiassed. Mr Cox seconded the motion.

Mr Tiles supported the motion, Mr Bagnall said he was glad to see the change whioh had come over the spirit of the dream of some members of committee. Mr Poiver, who had supported the resolution, had said on Wednesday that it would be dishonourable for that committee to ask any other person to take up the inquiry. Bis opinion was, that the committee should select the persons, and not refer it to the Provincial Government. The motion was agreed to. Mr' Cox thought they ought to give a vote of thanks to the • sub-committee. They did their best. Several members here left the room. Mr Power seconded the motion, which was carried. It was agreed that the President should communicate the resolution to the Government. A vote of thanks was passed to. the chairman, and the meeting terminated.