21

I.—lβ

Mr. Jellicoe : I only refer to it because it might be said I am here to make unfounded imputations against Ministers. I shall submit that the evidence before the Eesident Magistrate established a very strong case, demanding further investigation. If the cross-examination of Ghemis by Mr. Bell satisfies this Committee that he was speaking the truth, and that he came out of the crossexamination without his testimony being shaken —that he passed through the ordeal as a truthful man—then I submit that the Committee ought to make such a recommendation as will insure justice being done to this unfortunate individual. Before Igo through the evidence I have to ask the Committee to obtain the reports made by Ministers at the time the sentence was commuted. I believe Ministers investigated the whole case, and have left behind them some memoranda of the result of that investigation. Ido not know whether any such report has been received by your secretary, but I understand that all the Ministers did make reports, not only for the use of His Excellency, but the guidance of future Ministries and Parliament. The Chairman : Has that evidence before you been published ? Mr. Jellicoe : No; but I understand the Eegistrar has here the original depositions taken in the Eesident Magistrate's Court. The Chairman: I ask because I think it probable some of the Committee would like to look over the evidence. Mr. Jellicoe : Quite so. Mr. Cooper will now hand in the depositions. It was thought the Eesident Magistrate's inquiry would strengthen the hands of the Ministry in the matter. I never, anticipated the Magistrate would dismiss the charge. I claimed that an extremely strong primd facie case had been made out, and that it ought to go to a jury for trial. I knew Benjamin would be acquitted if innocent, and that his conviction would be an important element in the future consideration of Chemis's case. [Evidence read.] I desire to point out to the Committee, and I think my learned friend will concede it, that the prosecution was conducted with the utmost fairness. I could have called Louis Chemis to give his evidence before his wife, but, in order to remove the slightest suspicion of a concocted story, I thought it right and fair to have her in the witness-box first, and her evidence closed before Chemis was brought down from the gaol to give his evidence.' [Evidence continued.] I desire to point out that Mr. Bell, who was conducting the defence, observed that there had been recently a piece cut from the top of the box, and this no doubt suggested to his mind that it had been cut since the condemnation of Chemis for the purpose of manufacturing the wads produced. It turned out afterwards that the box was cut for experiments in the Cabinet room, and I think, therefore, that Mr. Bell is to be excused for having suggested that some one connected with Chemis cut off the piece for an improper purpose. Mrs. Chemis was severely cross-examined, and asked repeatedly such questions as, " Did you watch him (the detective) narrowly? Did you watch him closely ? " —the intention of the cross-examining counsel no doubt being to, if he could, trap the witness into admitting that she was watching closely, and the fact was some evidence that she knew her husband was guilty of the murder, and that any such admission could be used to show that she was not to be regarded as an honest witness. The letter referred to as having been sent to Mrs. Hawkings related to annoyance caused by Mrs. Hawkings's children to Mrs. Chemis's children. [Letter read, dated sth February, 1889.] That was at the time there was litigation regarding the lease. Evidence was given to prove that the bandbox was handed to the Premier, and he admitted that the box was not in the same condition when it was produced by him in the Eesident Magistrate's Court as it was when he originally received it from me. The re-examination of Mrs. Chemis for the purpose of negativing Mr. Bell's unfounded statement that the prosecution was by Jellicoe qua Jellicoe, and not by Mrs. Chemis on her own behalf. [Evidence continued.] Mr. Kelly : You have not answered the question which was put before—What has since become of Geoi'ge Bowles ? Mr. Jellicoe : I understand he has left the colony. The Chairman : Is it a fact that he left a short time after giving his evidence ? Mr. Jellicoe : A very short time after—while the perjury charges were going on, or shortly afterwards. I can fix the date pretty clearly. Mr. Kelly : Is Mrs. Hawkings still here ? Mr. Jellicoe : Yes, she is still here, I believe. Mr. Gully: Bowles was at the Wairarapa for some time. Mr. Jellicoe : That was Charles Bowles. Norman was subpoenaed to give evidence on the charge of perjury, and I shall have something to say as to his conduct later on. The Chairman: Norman and Charles Bowles were both living at Hawkings's house, were they not ? Mr. Jellicoe : Yes. Norman was subpoenaed by me to give evidence at the magisterial investigation. I propose to give some evidence as to what led me to subpoena him. He came into town to give evidence for the prosecution, and the first person he went to was Mr. Bell. He says, " I inquired for Mr. Bell in the library," and " I knew Mr. Bell was Benjamin's lawyer; " and mark, it was to Benjamin he gave his original statement. He also says, " I did not tell the Judge all that was in the statement." Pie had written out a statement which he had given to Benjamin during the trial of Chemis in the Supreme Court. He told all, he says, with the exception of that about Bowles.

Tuesday, 23rd August, 1892. Mr. Jellicoe (referring to paragraphs 44 and 45, pages 8 and 9, H.-33, 1889) : That is the statement by constables. The Committee (paragraph 45) : " When I first saw dagger there was verdigris at head of hilt." Was that referring to the verdigris on the cross handle or the blade ? Mr. Jellicoe : I think it was the blade. It was Mr. Skey, the analyst, who referred to the verdigris on the blade; the doctor did not examine it at all.