137
to be put in evidence in criminal proceedings, though they would have been admissible in evidence in a civil action under section 26 of the Evidence Ordinance 1889 (No. 2 of 1889).
6.
Thinking that it was useless to proceed with Gidley's case after Ward had been acquitted, the Attorney-General entered a nolle prosequi in respect of Gidley, who subsequently left the Colony for Canada without my permission and having resigned his office without having given a month's notice of his intention to do so. As I intended to bring his case before the Executive Council, I declined to accept his resignation, and, when he unauthorisedly left the Colony, dismissed him from the Service and caused that dismissal to be announced in the Gazette.
7.
Reverting to the case of Ward, I decided to bring him before the Executive Council with a view to suspension on the grounds set out in the Colonial Secretary's letter referred to in paragraph 4 of this Despatch, grounds which were based on the evidence taken by the Commission already alluded to.
On Friday the 23rd of November the Executive Council, from which the Officer Commanding the Council,