A.—2b,

16

Having been referred to in a petition for the mitigation of the sentence of Francis Christie, as holding the office of Colonial Secretary when an outbreak occurred in Darlinghurst Gaol, we have much pleasure in testifying to the fact of Christie's good conduct on that occasion, as well as to his general conduct during the entire period of his incarceration, so far as it came under my notice in either case. We are glad to record this opinion, so that it may operate as it ought in the prisoner's favour. And so far as these and other circumstances mentioned in the petition entitle his case to the favourable consideration of the Government, we are willing to add our testimony and recommendation. William Forster. 29th December, 1871. Eichard Hill. For about fourteen years I have been medical attendant on the family of Francis Christie, and have frequently visited him since his confinement in Darlinghurst, and during my last three visits I was glad to observe that he was greatly changed for the better, having entirely lost that peculiar ferocity of character which characterized him immediately after his capture in 1864 ; and it is my opinion that he is now completely recovered from his evil ways, and that it would be perfectly safe to permit him to go at large. A. Moffitt, Physician, &c. 135, Castlereagh Street, sth January, 1872. Some time since I visited Darlinghurst Gaol, and had a long conversation with the prisoner Christie, which has fully convinced me he deeply regrets the great wrongs he has done. Under this belief, and considering the long period he has been incarcerated, I am induced to sign this petition in his favour, and which I trust will be successful. Joseph Eceford. The Osborne, Sydney, 10th January, 1872. J. J. Josephson, Macquarie Street. James Sutton, Dowling Street and Moore Park (one of the Jury). Some years ago, whilst Christie, or Gardiner, was residing at Apis Creek, in the Colony of Queensland, keeping a roadside accommodation-house for travellers, we were travelling that way in company with Mr. Keen, and on our return had occasion to want some flour from a dray which we met on a road; the driver refused to sell, urging that it belonged to Christie. In about half-an-hour after Christie made his appearance, and, inquiring after his dray, we mentioned the fact, when he immediately rode on and ordered some to be sent to us. From inquiries his conduct caused us to make, we learned that his conduct was civil and obliging, and that he was always willing to help or serve any traveller. Since his long incarceration, we have made it a part of our duty to continually inquire of his behaviour and general deportment, and have found it to be good. Under these circumstances, and believing that when we saw him at Apis Creek he was a good member of society, we have now no hesitation in recommending the prayer of the petition. E. S. Hill. G. Hill.

(No. 2.) Minute of the Sheriff. Francis Christie, alias Clarke, alias Gardiner. 12th September, 1872. In returning the petition in this case with the usual particulars of conviction, I have thought it desirable to accompany the same with a special report from the Principal Gaoler (herewith enclosed) upon the conduct and services, together with a report from the Visiting Surgeon respecting the health, of the prisoner. Having regard to the prominence of prisoner's career, the circumstances attending the offences of which he was convicted, and the great length of his sentence (thirty-two years), the dealing with this case is of unusual importance, in respect of its bearing upon those of numerous other prisoners serving long sentences for offences of a similar character imposed during the prevalence of bush-ranging, who will form expectations or modify their hopes of commutation according to the decision that may be arrived at. There is in the minds of those prisoners an expectation, founded partly upon the remarks of the Judges when passing sentences, and partly upon the action of the Government in reductions made in some of the sentences referred to, that such sentences are not intended to be served in full, or even up to the periods of remission provided by the regulations. And if this view is to be entertained, it is desirable that the subject should be considered, and this and the other cases alluded to dealt with under a general idea of reduction of terms of sentence, modified in each case by the circumstances and the prison career of the prisoner: the greater proportionate reduction being allowed in the longer sentences according to the principle laid down in the Eemission Eegulations. It probably was never contemplated that this prisoner should serve the full period of his sentence ; and as he has now served eight years, and the crime of bush-ranging has been practically abated, the time for making any limitation would not seem to be unfavourable. This remark applies to the other cases in the same category. Such a course would tend to settle the minds of the prisoners concerned, and give them encouragement in reformation of conduct and industry. In the cases of the prisoners referred to, the granting of conditional pardons (to exile) would in many respects be more desirable than the granting of actual remissions, and would admit of cases being dealt with at earlier periods, and without so apparent an interference with the ordinary operation of the Eemission Eegulations. The release of a prisoner under a conditional pardon is not open, as regards its effect on the criminal class, to so strong objections as his release in this colony, wherein he might return to his former neighbourhood.