The Argus at KellyGang 2/5/1882

THE POLICE COMMISSION

TO THE EDITOR OF THE ARGUS

Sir,-Your journal of to day contains a leading article commenting upon the decision of the Police Commission for deciding to exclude the press from future meetings. You commence by stating that 'the public is to have the conclusions only,' and 'the witnesses are to be examined in private, and then, when the report is published, no one will know whether it is contrary to evidence or otherwise.' This is clearly self contradictory, as when the report is published it can then be seen whether or not it is contrary to evidence. True the public will not have the evidence furnished daily through the press, but you know that a copy of the evidence will be supplied to the press at the close, so that the public will have the same advantages as before of being informed of the whole proceedings. You further state- "But the evidence we are not to have. Now this is simply misleading and untrue, because you imply that the press will at no time be furnished with the evidence, whereas you know to the contrary. You must admit that certain evidence will be tendered by detectives and others regarding their secret work that it would be very undesirable should be made public to all grades of society, and during the former part of the investigation the commission was very much hampered (and following witnesses pruned) through evidence being published that would have been better suppressed for a time. But I may say, in conclusion, that after reading some of your articles on the Police Commission even from its formation, any attempt to satisfy you would be fruitless; therefore, we study to do our duty to the public, and I may inform you that all with whom I have spoken on the subject express their approval of the action taken by the commission in excluding the press during the present inquiry. Even the press is not unanimous in opposing the present action of the commission, as you will observe a contemporary expresses his delight mainly from an economical point of view, being a saving in paper and reporters' wages -Yours, &c ,

G. WILSON HALL,

Melbourne , April 26

[No doubt the evidence will be published from the shorthand writers notes some time but not necessarily at the same time as the report, and no one knows better than Mr Hall that in the voluminous form in which it is given the evidence can with difficulty be analysed by the press, and is buried so far as the public is concerned -ED A]