THE MEIKLE COMMISSION.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXIX, Issue 8392, 9 April 1907, Page 5

THE MEIKLE COMMISSION.

By Telegraph—Press Association. WELLINGTON, April 8. Justices Edwards and Cooper, in their report on the claims of John James Meikle, find asjfollows:—That the conviction of William Lambert for perjury did not establish Meikle's innocence, nor, per se, raise a reasonable presumption that the claimant was innocent or was wrongly convicted. No evidence has been adduced to show that Meikle has made any statements inconsistent with his innocence. Meikle has proved himself in evidence to be utterly unworthy of credit in any matter'affecting his own interests. Their Honors are not able to attach much greater weight to the evidence of his wife. "Nevertheless," they state, "we are of opinion that if the proceedings before us had been an actual retrial of the claimant before a jury, upon a charge of sheepstealing, the evidence of his guilt is so far from conclusive that it would have been proper to acquit the claimant. As to the circumstances under which Meikle accepted £294 16s Id in full settlement of his claims for legal costs, etc., and whether, apart from legal consideration, the settlement then made should b3 treated as final, their Honors find that such should, apart from legal consideration, be treated as final. In respect of the prosecution of Lambert, in effect their Honors declare that Meikle had no claim against the State, and it resolves itself into a question for State bounty, a, question which Parliament n decide. There should, however, be some definite rule by which a final settlement can be arrived at in such cases, so as to preclude such claims being made afterwards. Their Honors report that Meikle's claim to have his name removed from the prison records cannot be given effect to, either having regard to English precedent or to common sense and safety, and inviolately to public records.