The Argus at KellyGang 5/1/1882
Having dealt with the report of the Police Commission as a whole, we may now pass on to some of its particular recommendations. The first of the present officers of the force whose case is noticed is Mr C H NICOLSON, the assistant commissioner of police, who is at present suspended from duty at the instance of Mr LONGMORE and his coadjutors. The report says:-
"Mr Nicolson, assistant-commissioner, has shown himself in many respects a capable and zealous officer throughout his career in the force, but he laboured under great difficulties through undue interference on the part of Captain Standish, and the jealousy occasioned by that officer's favouritism towards Superintendent Hare. The want of unanimity between these officers was frequently the means of preventing concerted action on important occasions, and the interests of the colony suffered greatly there-by. In view of these facts the commission do not think that the force would be benefited by reinstating Mr Nicolson in the office of acting chief commissioner of police."
The logic is the commissioners' own. Mr NICOLSON, we are told, has been "capable and zealous throughout his career," that is, from beginning to end. He was treated unjustly, it is said, by Captain STANDISH, and therefore he is to be got rid of. Ordinary mortals would be apt to draw an exactly opposite conclusion from the premises, and to say that if an officer is capable and zealous, an effort should be made to retain him in the service, and that if the officer was treated unjustly in the past that is a reason why he should receive consideration in the future. That Mr NICOLSON served the state loyally and well, that he was harshly treated.
Captain STANDISH, and that reparation rather than punishment is due to him, is, we would submit, apparent from the papers. On relieving Captain STANDISH in charge of the Kelly district in July, 1879, he inaugurated a new system. He came to the conclusion that the sending out of search parties into the wilds and fastnesses of the Kelly country was folly. The evil was to be met, he thought, not so much by isolated efforts at arrest as by organising a system to stamp out brigandage. Mr NICOLSON, therefore, protected the banks; he kept small bodies of men in various places ready for action; he made systematic efforts to induce the well-disposed portion of the population to afford information, and he made great use of secret agents. When he took charge it was not even known that the KELLYS were in the country. As time wore on, Mr NICOLSON got to know all about the gang and their movements. The KELLYS found themselves crippled.
In May, 1880, Mr NICOLSON was able to report that the gang had done nothing since he took charge; that their funds were exhausted; that they were suffering great hardships, and that they were being driven to expose themselves to betrayal or capture. He was aware that mould-boards had been stolen from the farmers, and that iron armour had been manufactured. Every precaution, the commissioners state (page 21), was then taken. Bridges and crossing places were watched. Special instructions were issued to every station. Constant telegraphic communication was maintained throughout the district. Mr NICOLSON was confident either that his information would enable him to lead the police to a spot where "they could lay their hands on the throats of the outlaws without any trouble," or that there would be an outbreak which would be followed by the capture of the gang. We know now that this information and these views were correct.
The KELLYS were rendered powerless, and they were suffering terrible hardships. DAN KELLY's face was so emaciated that you could put your fists under his cheek bones, is one statement which describes the straits to which the hunted gang had been driven. And this was the moment when Captain STANDISH reported to the then Chief Secretary (page 5) that nothing was being done, and that he did not see what good Mr NICOLSON would ever effect." It is clear that the mad outbreak at Glenrowan was the direct result of the steady pressure exerted by Mr NICOLSON, and it is much to be regretted that he was not in command of the district when the event occurred. He believed in the armour information, and with this knowledge he would not have made the rush at the hotel, which was brave, no doubt, but which resulted in disaster, civilians losing their lives and the police their commander. The commissioners suggest that, "in consequence of his impaired constitution, caused by hardships endured in the late Kelly pursuits, Mr NICOLSON be allowed to retire on his superannuation allowance as though he had attained the age of 55 years." The evidence shows, however, that Mr NICOLSON is willing to serve, and considers himself well able to serve, and if that is the case there is no reason why a capable and zealous officer should be got rid of. At any rate, the suspension should be removed. Mr NICOLSON should be reinstated and thanked, and if he leaves, it should be because it is advisable in his own interests that he should go, and not under the slur that "the force would not be benefited by his reinstatement."
Neither praise nor blame awarded to Mr NICOLSON should be taken to affect Mr Superintendent HARE. These officers must each stand upon his own merits. It is unfortunate that there should have been ill-will between the two. At the same time, as neither officer was in command in the Kelly district, the quarrel does not seem to have affected the search for the outlaws so much as was at first supposed. The commissioners say:-
"Superintendent Hare's services in the police force have been praiseworthy and creditable, but nothing special has been shown in hie actions that would warrant the commission in recommending his retention in the force," &c.
No sentence could show more clearly the bias of the commissioners. Mr HARE'S conduct has been "praiseworthy and "creditable," but he must go, unless Mr LONGMORE can be shown reasons to the contrary ; and the position of Mr LONGMORE is a very old one – he is open to conviction, but he would like to see the man who can convince him.
No doubt Mr HARE'S services were praiseworthy. He endured great hardships in connexion with the search parties. He said to his men "come," and never "go." Evidence that the men believed in him, and would follow him anywhere, is to be found in every page. The commissioners do not venture to insinuate that he ever shirked a duty, however difficult or dangerous. But a bitter personal animus is allowed continually to peep out. It is said that Mr HARE left the front without transferring his command to any one, and the statement is unfair if not literally untrue. In mortal danger from loss of blood, and unable to keep the field, Mr HARE told Inspector O'CONNOR and Senior-Constable KELLY, " I'm hit, for " God's sake surround the house and " don't let the outlaws escape ;" and these instructions were acted upon ; but Mr LONGMORE, sitting at ease in his armchair ("he jests at scars who never felt a wound") says that an officer badly hit ought to make a formal, a red tape, perhaps a written transfer. The commissioners stoop to the insinuation that the surgeon employed to attend Mr HARE was a relative, and the allegation is unwarranted and untrue. They say that the Government paid £600 for surgical attendance on Mr HARE, and questioned a charge of four guineas for the treatment of one of the black trackers. If so, what has Mr HARE to do with that? Did he grudge the money due on account of the black-fellow? A score of insinuations and assertions to the detriment of this officer, as vicious and as silly as those we have given, could be quoted.
It should be said that the commissioners have only adopted the recommendations with regard to Mr NICOLSON and Mr HARE by a majority of four to three. Mr LONGMORE heads the majority, and Mr J Gunn, MLA, the minority. We must submit that reason and fairness are both on the side of the latter section. As to the future of the two officers, we should hope that under new conditions the old quarrel could be forgotten, and that the services of both men could be retained. If not, and if it is thought better that one of the twain should go, there can be no necessity to sacrifice the other in order to gratify the malevolence of Mr FRANCIS LONGMORE.
| ! | The text has been retyped from a microfiche copy of the original. We have taken care to reproduce this document but areas of the original text may been damaged. |
