Changes
Import from source
'''Full text of article'''
The Police [[Royal Commission-followup|Commission]] has decided to work in the dark. Publicity does not suit it. The members have tried the experiment of allowing the public to know the facts on which they based their conclusions, and the result is so unsatisfactory that now the public is to have the conclusions only. The facts are to be kept in the background as fas as possible. 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. Very likely the commissioners regard this last movement as clever, but possibly ''cunning" would be the better word to use, and cunning usually defeats itself. Such is likely to be the result on the present occasion. A report dealing with one if the most important departments of the state must rest on one of two foundations. It must be based either on evidence which will speak for itself, or on the confidence felt in the judgment and the good faith of the members of the commission. But the evidence we are not to have, and the confidence felt in the ability and the fairness of the members of the Police Commission - speaking of them as a whole and in their corporate capacity - must now be of the smallest degree.
The last report is felt to altogether enhance Mr Longmore's claims as a muddler. The Steele fiaisco was a titbit of blundering, and the thoroughgoing manner in which Mr Hare's character was assailed, without regard to delicacy or veracity, is to be included amongst the best things of a master in the art. The idea of revising a system on the unsupported recommendation of Mr Longmore is a joke in itself; but though the report will be harmless enough, its preparation is likely to work mischief. The officers are to be invited to tell tales about each other, the men are to be assured of sympathising ears for scandals and complaints. Nothing but evil resulted from the preposterous manner in which officers and men were examined at the open sittings, and now that the disaffected and the schemers are to have more latitude than ever, the consequences are easily anticipated. The demonstration so much complained of must be increased.
What is wanted at this juncture is such a reform as can be both recommended and carried out by a competent and responsible officer, well acquainted with the force and its necessities, and Ministers have selected Mr H M Chomley as the man, and have entrusted him with the mission. The commission blocks the way. Its answer to the criticism of the press is "closed doors." Its reply to the appointment of Mr Chomley to do its work is to summon that gentleman as a witness. What remains to be seen is whether anything can be done in Parliament to cheek this eccentric and mischievous carreer.
[[The Argus at KellyGang 13/1/1879|Order Now]]<br />
{{MicroficheCopy}}<br />
<div id="newspaper-nav">
[[The Argus at KellyGang 17/4/1882|Previous edition]] [[The Argus at KellyGang 27/4/1882|Next edition]]
</div>
[[Category:1880s]] [[Category:1882]] [[Category:April 1882]] [[Category:The Argus]] [[Category:Newspaper]] [[Category:press report]] [[Category:1882]] [[Category:history]] [[Category:Royal Commission into the Kelly Gang]] [[Category:police commission]]
MediaWiki:Sidebar
{{^|Original page location \documents\N82\82_04_26_Argus1.html}}
The Police [[Royal Commission-followup|Commission]] has decided to work in the dark. Publicity does not suit it. The members have tried the experiment of allowing the public to know the facts on which they based their conclusions, and the result is so unsatisfactory that now the public is to have the conclusions only. The facts are to be kept in the background as fas as possible. 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. Very likely the commissioners regard this last movement as clever, but possibly ''cunning" would be the better word to use, and cunning usually defeats itself. Such is likely to be the result on the present occasion. A report dealing with one if the most important departments of the state must rest on one of two foundations. It must be based either on evidence which will speak for itself, or on the confidence felt in the judgment and the good faith of the members of the commission. But the evidence we are not to have, and the confidence felt in the ability and the fairness of the members of the Police Commission - speaking of them as a whole and in their corporate capacity - must now be of the smallest degree.
The last report is felt to altogether enhance Mr Longmore's claims as a muddler. The Steele fiaisco was a titbit of blundering, and the thoroughgoing manner in which Mr Hare's character was assailed, without regard to delicacy or veracity, is to be included amongst the best things of a master in the art. The idea of revising a system on the unsupported recommendation of Mr Longmore is a joke in itself; but though the report will be harmless enough, its preparation is likely to work mischief. The officers are to be invited to tell tales about each other, the men are to be assured of sympathising ears for scandals and complaints. Nothing but evil resulted from the preposterous manner in which officers and men were examined at the open sittings, and now that the disaffected and the schemers are to have more latitude than ever, the consequences are easily anticipated. The demonstration so much complained of must be increased.
What is wanted at this juncture is such a reform as can be both recommended and carried out by a competent and responsible officer, well acquainted with the force and its necessities, and Ministers have selected Mr H M Chomley as the man, and have entrusted him with the mission. The commission blocks the way. Its answer to the criticism of the press is "closed doors." Its reply to the appointment of Mr Chomley to do its work is to summon that gentleman as a witness. What remains to be seen is whether anything can be done in Parliament to cheek this eccentric and mischievous carreer.
[[The Argus at KellyGang 13/1/1879|Order Now]]<br />
{{MicroficheCopy}}<br />
<div id="newspaper-nav">
[[The Argus at KellyGang 17/4/1882|Previous edition]] [[The Argus at KellyGang 27/4/1882|Next edition]]
</div>
[[Category:1880s]] [[Category:1882]] [[Category:April 1882]] [[Category:The Argus]] [[Category:Newspaper]] [[Category:press report]] [[Category:1882]] [[Category:history]] [[Category:Royal Commission into the Kelly Gang]] [[Category:police commission]]
MediaWiki:Sidebar
{{^|Original page location \documents\N82\82_04_26_Argus1.html}}
