28
Governor's despatch
of the
circumstantial statement
contained in them to the effect that Dr Eitel was instructed to explain the documents and that his explanations were the
Governor's own. There is no doubt that Dr Eitel
was instructed to
show the documents. To explain them was not a great step further, whether he was authorised to do so or not. I see no
I see no reason for supposing that Dr Eitel did not believe the explanations to be true, nor after the Governor's private denial of the picture story do I think that Dr Eitel can be blamed for his
public retraction. I think that he is
much to
be pitied for being left to bear alone the open discredit of an
untruth which was not
really
35. I'm serving his chief,
Dr Eitel
may not have been troubled with considerations of
delicacy and chivalry. It is true that he was engaged in dirty work.
But it has yet to be proved that
dirty
work was not given to him
or that he did not act
throughout in perfect good faith and in sheer obedience and grovelling loyalty to his
master.
36. I think that Eur Johnson
was perfectly mystified in bringing the case forward, but I nevertheless think that no case has been made out for Dr Eitel's dismissal from his remaining appointment. I do not suppose that Eur Johnson has seen Dr Eitel's defence any more than that Dr Eitel has seen the Governor's despatch.
It would have been a great
37. The best chance of arriving at the truth would have been the trial of the action, which the
was quite
able to avoid as
auxiliary
to Dr Eitel. An enquiry
by the Executive Council