Ovens and Murray Advertiser at KellyGang 24/7/1880 (3)
Full text of the article
——————
KELLY, THE MURDERER
The delineation of the character of Kelly, given by Professor Nimshi at Wangaratta six years since, is as follows:—“The head of this man is non-intellectual. The base of the skull, with the whole bassiller section of the brain, is a massive development of the lower animal proclivities, and which, being vastly in excess of the moral sectional measurement, inclines him to the perpetration of sensual animal vices, and which with an adverse facial angle prompts him to the commission of vicious, brutal acts of outrage and aggressiveness. He has large organs of self-esteem and love of approbation, which gives self-conceit and vanity. If the one be wounded or the other mortified, his animal nature would know no bounds. He would be likely under sudden surprise to commit the grossest outrages; and, being uncontrolled by any moral sentiment, stamps his character as wolfish and ravenous, his notions of moral right giving him a dangerous range of action.”We think it high time that society should avail itself of the means of protection that phrenology affords, which a true exponent of it can readily give by pointing out the different traits of character of individuals, either for good or for harm. We think it should receive a public recognition, and be taught in our schools. We should say that the sooner the Government recognises the efficient services of such a man as Professor Nimshi, who is now amongst us. By appointing him as Visiting Inspector of our public schools to discover the children’s capability and traits of character, the better it will be for the community at large. “To be forewarned is to be forearmed.”—“St Arnaud Mercury.”
GLENROWAN AND POLICE ORGANISATION
We have endeavoured to show in a previous article that the recklessness attributed to the police at Glenrowan in respect to all lives except their own was not substantiated by facts.Our views are now fully confirmed by the reports of Superintendent Hare' and Sadleir, by a letter of Mr Rawlins (a Benalla volunteer) to the Argus, and by an account of the fight, evidently furnished by Sub-inspector O’Connor, which has appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald. All our facts are borne out by these gentlemen.When young JONES was shot, the police did not know there were others than the outlaws in the house; Cherry was wounded by Ned Kelly ' himself, and was known by the attacking party to be lying in an out-house when the main building was fired; the various contingents as they came up were at first ignorant as to the prisoners; when that was ascertained, and that all innocent persons were lying down, the police were ordered to fire breast high, and the men themselves were so anxious to assault the house throughout the day that they could only be restrained by the most positive orders.
But, while we consider that the police on that occasion were influenced neither by regardlessness of human life nor want of gallantry, the circumstances afford unquestionable testimony of the inefficiency of the present police system.It is almost universally considered that the Victorian police force is not so popular as it formerly was. It is certainly not the business of a constable to carry favor with civilians; but it is highly desirable, especially in view of the disagreeable duties which he is constantly called upon to perform, that the whole force should stand well in the eyes of the public.Such relations between the two materially assist the police in the repression of violence and the discovery of crime.The partial popularity of the constabulary, however, is, we think, founded on temporary and inadequate causes which are easily removable.
We have all frequently heard it said during the last eighteen months that the police did not wish to meet the Kellys; or that they must have often seen them in their mutual wanderings; or that if they did come across them the police would “have no show.” We do not here allude to the Sebastopol affair, as we confess we do not wish even to refer to it; but it is known that the other statement had no foundation.
.1. , .2. , .3. , .4. ,.5. , .6. , .7. , .8. , .9. , .10. , .11. , .12. , .13. , .14. , .15. ,
| ! | 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. |
