THE SOUTHLAND CONSPIRACY CASE.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 475, 9 March 1869, Page 2

THE SOUTHLAND CONSPIRACY CASE.

Our readers are already in possession of the facts with regard to the trial of contractor M'Kenzie, and two others, Aylmer and Sayer, charged with conspiracy against the Southland Government, in reference to some contracts. They were discharged on a demurrer to the original indictment, but were again indicted, and admitted to hail. The following statement of the case was made to the Grand Jury by Judge Ward at the trial which has failed:— According to the evidence of Mr Armstrong, it would be shown that on the night of the Ist October, he obtained the keys of the box in which the tenders were deposited from Mr Aylmer, and that the box was then locked. On the previous evening (September 30th), the tenders were placed in a box by Aylmer, and taken to the Government Buildings, and there left. Aylmer subsequently met

M'Kenzie. When the servant arose on the following morning, he was Btill in bed) but from the appearance of a tin billy or pannican, water had been boiled during the night. On the same an express-driver calling for Mr M'Kenzie at the house of Aylmer, as he had the previous even* ing been directed by Vt'Kenzie to do, was met by Sayers, who told him that M'Kenzie had gone out. It would be for the G-rand Jury to say whether, in their opinion, the chain of connection between the three was complete. On the evening of the Ist of October, Mr Armstrong took possession of the box containing the tenders, and it was then discovered that without a doubt the tenders had been opened. With regard to the evidence against M'Kenzie, his own statement was almost tantamount to a confession. To Mr Dalgleish he stated, " Contractors know how to do these things," and he also stated that he was in possession of the amounts sent in by the different tendei*ers. There could be little doubt but there was a prima facie, case on the part of the Crown. The evidence against Sayers, His Honor thought the most meagre ; while, as regarded Aylmer, there was the presumptive evidence that the key to the tender box, being in his possession, its contents could not be tampered with without his knowledge. As to M'Kenzie there was his own statement, and the inferrence from Sayers's statement that he had been at Aylmer's house on the night of the 30th September. He need scarcely remind them that the case was one of extreme importance. The offence was not merely a breach of trust on the part of Aylmer but a gross fraud on the public.