CO129-197 - Governor Hennessy - 1882 [1-2] — Page 19

J

1 As to Dr Eitel -

I think that judging him solely by what he has himself written - that he is guilty has virg

Jences

41) After being told by the Governor that one incident in making any statement "as directed" : / Members Council he should say that the Governor could not specify the book in question further beyond this that it was a book containing pictures & letter

thee par 32) _ he told Mr Phason pointedly and after his attention had been specially directed to the point that "there was no mistake about it was the catalogue of the Musée Privée"

927

with bis Ebden that this is not

I cannot agree a material part of the leader

ho

harm in

Mushrated

there would b

hinging on catalogue f

a Museum

-himidired

423

which contained one picture which might be indecent (unless it was shown that the best to shew that particular picture, and St Eitel did not allege that any picture was shewn - but merely that Stayler was in the bonding with the book Theil

2

he tried to hide) - but to bring a catalogue containing pictures not shewn to the public on account of their indecency was not a mild offence I think thereby that by her own

Eitel Lavring first "(in letter 5 Nov) denied and then (in letter 7 28 Nov) admitted the accuracy of daphnomi's vereein

the Conservation and (in letter 27 Dec paragraphs 36 +38) tries to explain away his statements by saying that he held Johare the fort had first described the book as the catalogue of the Suret Museum but offends but he cannot,

20 Nov admitting the accuracy escape from his letter of the statements in the Pitite in the action –

red

5. Eitel is therefore self convicted of uttering a slanderous statement which he had expressly by the person from whom he professes to have derived all his information could not be supported

(2).

Eitel wrote in 5 Nov, 5 Nov, on

22

18

letter denying

accuracy of les phar's report this statement in two particulars - viz (1) as to the book being the catalogue of the catalogue of the private Museum (2) as to the connection between the discovery of the book and the foremosst uteon the Sambout Seurain

and on the 28th I stas he wrote another letter retracting the former and admitting

the accuracy of Mason's Statement_

One or

these

Three letters must have contained

a false statement

and I think it does.

Why

or assumed against of Wiled that the former

he affects that bit arse the untrue letter.

written under dictation from the Governor but that is no excuse for writing a deliberate falsehood and his explanation (in par soghis letter of Dec 27) that he did not see the meaning what he wrote cannot with respect to such

a document be admitted -

In these grounds I think that without represe to any controverted matter Dr. Eitel has proved himself a person unfit to remain in the public service -

If Sir John Hennepy's statements are to be accepted Dr Eitel is further guilty of having

made the slanderous statements with such without

(for 3 years despatch)

but in

the case

his pemupione against his express fresh satiron warning (for 13) but this is

by Dr Silet and I Hally contradictio

Chu

judge

do not think that the Scorelay & Stati beteres them in the absence of conobarations ins

but the fact of his) Amnesty harnes allowed stained it titel as has inte korting afte he knew of the shlements made by Well & putason

Sither side