41

I.—IB.

G. OBAIG.]

little further. You might state that you had been hypnotized, and it might be perfectly true; but if you came to me in a state of great excitement and were trembling, and so on, and told me excitedly that you had been hypnotized by somebody, and that you had not been the same man since, I should begin to ask a few questions, I think. I should want to know whether you had not been taking enough water with your daily allowance, and so on. I would like to find something else probably, and if 1 found enough to justify me 1 would consider these facts observed by myself, and would commit you. 96. He was simply excitable and told you about hypnotism, and on this you committed him? —No. I committed him because he was emotional and excitable, and because he stated he had been hypnotized by his stepfather plus the statement that he had attempted, under a previous emotional and excitable strain, to shoot his wife. 97. At no time did you notice, from your own observation, any sign of petit mal? —l would not put that statement down, because that conveys a wrong impression. You may pass a man in the street —you may be sitting down to dinner xvith people any day and they may be epileptic, and you will not see them have petit mal or any other form of epilepsy. Because I do not see any sign it does not say it is not there. 98. What I want to get at is that you yourself did not see petit mail —l did not see him have an attack of petit mal. 99. Up to the time of the committal? —Up to the time of the committal or afterwards: I never saw it. 100. Mr. Robertson.] You said that you knew nothing whatever about the alleged attempt on the part of Johnston to shoot his wife until the 14th December —the day you committed him? —Yes. 101. If Sergeant Wohlmann states on oath that you communicated to him a statement to the effect that Johnston had made a statement of that nature to him, would that be true?—l do not know. Perhaps my memory wants refreshing. I have not looked into this matter. It is possible that I have been confusing it. 102. I will read you what Sergeant Wohlmann said : "Q. '1 he contents of that statement, dealing xvith certain incidents in Johnston's past, were known to you prior to your making that statement?— A. No, not in detail. I only knew that Dr. Craig, who was his private medical adviser, told me that in his opinion the man xvas of unsound mind. Johnston had consulted him privately, and he thought xve ought to keep an eye on Johnston. He did not think he xvas safe to be at large." Then, further on :" Q. Ihe first time the police knew of Johnston's attempt to shoot his wife was from his own statement on 2nd December? — A. That was the first detailed information, but, as I said, I had a hint from Dr. Craig that the man had made extraordinary statements to him. and from his observation as a medical man he had come to the conclusion that Johnston should be committed to an asylum." That is "hat Sergeant Wohlmann said? —Something comes back to me noxv—wdiat led up to Johnston coming to me. I had forgotten that. There is no reason for concealing it; in fact, it has a very important bearing on the case, and if you will allow me I will explain it. There is absolutely no need for concealment in anything. I am quite willing to stand or fall by my certificate. There is a matter that had slipped my memory, and I think the Committee ought to know it. Detective Cooney came to me some time prior to Johnston telling me. He did not mention anybody, but he put the case in front of me. He said, " A man has come to me and told me that he shot his wife." Noxv, that xvas what led up to Johnston coming to me Detective Cooney said that he did not know xvhat to do about it, but he had advised this man to come to me for treatment, because he seemed run down ; and Johnston did come to me, but I never mentioned that to Johnston. I never tried to get the fact of his shooting his wife from him. I never mentioned that. I remember that noxv. 103. The first time that Johnston came under the care of yourself as a medical man was subsequent to Cooney's telling you?— Yes. subsequent to that—probably very shortly afterwards. 104. Detective-Sergeant Cooney. as a matter of fact, in his statement states that he rang you up about this man and told you he was sending him round to you? —He rang me up. I advised him to get the map to come to me. 105. He says, " I thought his nerves were somewhat shattered, and, not believing his story, I sent him round to Dr. Craig's to get something for his nerves. I 'phoned to Dr. Craig telling him Johnston was coming to see him. I subsequently saw Dr. Craig, who considers he is an epileptic, xvhich is a dangerous form of lunacy " 1- Yes, I remember that now. 1.06. Johnston did not come under your care till some time subsequent to the 2nd December? —Yes, some time subsequent. I think I saw him about twice or three times altogether. 107. And he xvas committed on the 14th? Yes. 108. So he could not have been under your observation for more than twelve days?— No. Of course, you cannot expect a man to remember all these details. 109. Sergeant Wohlmann had a similar statement made to him as was made to Sergeant Cooney on the same day. the 2nd December. T asked him this question : " The first time the police knexv of Johnston's attempt to shoot his wife was from his own statement on 2nd December? " and he replied. "That was the first detailed information, but. as I said, T had a hint from Dr. Craig that the man had made extraordinary statements to him." So it must have been prior to the 2nd December that Johnston made the statement to Sergeant Wohlmann?—l think Sergeant Wohlmann is wrong there, because Johnston made no statement to me with regard to shooting his wife, but he did make extraordinary statements. 110. My point is that you were evidently in a position to make statements about Johnston's condition prior to the 2nd December? —Possibly I was. but at the same time I did not, as far as I can remember. As a matter of fact I did not mention to Johnston any knowledge of the shooting.

6—l. Ib.