Page 3 Advertisements Column 2

Wairarapa Standard, Volume I, Issue 50, 16 December 1867, Page 3

[Advertisement.] (To the Editor of the Waikaiupa Mehotov.) West Taratahi, Dec. 9, 1867, Sib, —In your issue cf the 12th October, there appeared a very one-sided report of the fire which occurred on my premises on the 29th of September, and also of the inquest which was held upon the same. You will much oblige me by publishing a faithful account of some of the facts connected with the affair, as I think that in justice to myself and the public, the thing ought not to be allowed to drop. An inquest was certainly held on the lire before Dr Spratt and a jury ; one of the jurymen by the bye was a German, and another a boy of not quite 18 years of age, and I received no notice that such in inquest was to be held until eight months before the time appointed for holding it. I had previously informed the policeman that I had seen Charles Gawler near the site of the fire when I first discovered it myself, and he received a subpoena in my presence to attend the inquest; the policeman warning him at the time that he had only eight minutes to reach the place where the inquest was to be held. I beg here to state that 1 had no suspicion of Charles Gawler being in any way connected with the fire, and only thought that he might be able to give some informationabout it, as he was on the spot before myself. Instead of going to the inquest he went to a neighbor’s house where he remained about an hour, and then went home to his father’s house and sent hia father and brother instead—and the last I heard of Charles Gawler was, that on the following day he imperilled his life to get across the Ruamahunga in company with James Reid. lam perfectly acquainted with Charles Gawler, and am certain that I saw him about six o’clock on the morning of the fire, within three chains of the premises, and yet his father and brother—both swore at the inquest that he did not leave his bed on that morning until between the hours of 8 and 9 o’clock. Mr Gawler further stated that his son Charles had been unwell for two days before the fire occurred, and unable to do anything ; still, he was able according to Mr Gawler’s own statement to go to Greytown on the morning the fire occurred, and that he did not return till late in the evening, Now, Mr Editor, at half-past 7 o’clock when Mr Gawler states that he was in bed, my son saw,. Charles Gawler two miles away from his father’s house, and not going in the direction of Greytown, I was in Greytown myself nearly the whole of the day, and I saw nothing of him, and a neighbor informed me that he was at her house at 4 p.ra., and consequently he could not have [remained in Greytown until late in the evening as Mr Gawler asserted. It certainly would be a very hard case for a father and brother to have to come and make statements injurious to the character of a son or brother—but such was not required from them, because, as I before stated, I do not suspect Charles Gawler of having anything to do with the fire. Then, why Sin, should there have been so many contradictory statements made as to where Charles Gawler really was on the morning the fire occurred and during the remainder of the day ? and again, on the day previous to the fire, and when Mr Gawler states that his son was sick and unable to do anything; his wife states that he was planting potatoes, which is certainly not a very suitable job for an invalid. You: are already aware that the jury returned a verdict to the effect that the premises were set lire to by some person or persons unknown, and the reason that I have dwelt so much on Mr Gawler and his son’s connection with the inquest is this, I was desirous of having the matter further investigated, and accordingly applied to Dr Spratt for a copy of the depositions made at the inquest, and paid him £1 for a document which now lies before me. From this copy of the depositions the answers to the questions' which I put to Mr Gawler through the foreman of the jury, and which I consider the most impoatant part , of his deposition are altogether omittid ; and on my pointing this out to Dr Spratt. He said that what I required was embodied in the evidence, and that was all he t satisfaction I gotfromhim. On the moaning of the 30th September, I succeeded in quite extinguishing the fire, and a few hours after I had done so, the fences round the place which had been burnt were again set. fire to. George Gawler admits in his evidence at the inquest that both he and his brother Charles went past the place to their work between the time that the fire was extinguished aad' when I again found it to be in flames. Strange to-say, the Coroner, as lam informed upon good authority,' merely fined Charles Gawler 10s for contempt of court, and allowed his father to. pay it for him in his absence, and here the'enatter dropped. I never remember in all xny travels to have found the office of Coroner to be filled by a doctor—at all events, life pills or salts and senna would not offer much consolation to a man who had his place burnt down. , I have troubled you with this long letter, as I wish to make such proceedings sa public as possible, for when the authorities do not take more stringent measures to investigate cases of this kind; there is not that ’check upon the future perpetration of such crimes which it is. desirable for the safety of society at large that there should be. * ■ a i: ..lam,.Sir, Your3.&c., ... ■ .. ' Jambs Leydoh, ,