Changes
Import from source
Story of the KellyGang - the Royal Commission evidence
[[Royal Commission report day 28 page 5|previous page]] / [[Royal Commission report day 28 page 7|next page]]
== The Royal Commission evidence for 9/6/1881 ==
''''''
=== full text ===
(see also introduction to [[Royal Commission report 9/6/1881|day 28]])
'''Insp William B. [[Insp Wliiam Montfort|Montfort]] giving evidence'''
<span id="rc11064">[[#rc11064|11064]]</span> In the 25th section the last clause says, “The Chief Commissioner may also, if he think fit, discharge him without assigning any reason.” Do you think that is just to the force itself; do you think a clause like that is likely to be of service to the police force generally?— It was put in as a sort of safetyvalve after that clause empowering the Government to appoint an outsider to a certain position in the force, if necessary. For instance, if it was necessary to appoint an officer in charge of the detectives, it might be necessary to send to London, to England, and it is only exercised in extreme cases; that power of dismissing a man without a reason has not, during my experience of twenty-eight years, ever been exercised.
<span id="rc11065">[[#rc11065|11065]]</span> It could be exercised with impunity against a man if there was nothing against him?— No.
<span id="rc11066">[[#rc11066|11066]]</span> ''By Mr. O'Connor''— Are you not aware that the late Chief Commissioner was appointed from outside the force?— Yes, but the Chief Commissioner joined in 1858, I think. He was appointed under the Regulations that immediately preceded these, of which those are a copy. Captain MacMahon was Acting Chief Commissioner immediately preceding him in the same way; but when I say the officers, we never look upon the Chief Commissioner as an officer; he is in a different schedule in the Estimates even. He is entered down along with the clerks.
<span id="rc11067">[[#rc11067|11067]]</span> Would it not be just as much against the interests of the men if any new regulations were framed that would debar a man from rising from the ranks?— Yes.
<span id="rc11068">[[#rc11068|11068]]</span> Anything new would tend to interfere with them?— Yes.
<span id="rc11069">[[#rc11069|11069]]</span> And therefore, if you studied the temper of the men, things should go on just as they are, land you would get officers of fifty, sixty, and eighty, eventually?— I do not think that is likely to be the case. I do not wish to criticise what is past, but I believe the retention of certain officers in the force has militated considerably against the promotion in the service.
<span id="rc11070">[[#rc11070|11070]]</span> ''By the Commission''— It was stated by Sergeant Steele that it would require [[Police pay and Conditions|political influence]] for a man to raise himself in the force — is that the general feeling in the force?— Yes, it has become very much so of late years.
<span id="rc11071">[[#rc11071|11071]]</span> That is the feeling among the men?— Yes, some men will not resort to it.
<span id="rc11072">[[#rc11072|11072]]</span> Have any been appointed apparently through political influence?— That I do not know—I was not in a position to know what influence was brought to bear on the Chief Commissioner.
<span id="rc11073">[[#rc11073|11073]]</span> Might that not arise from men hoping to be the next, and fancying they should be?— It might be very likely. A man came to me when I was in charge of No. 1 division and asked to see the superintendent, and wrote a report, calling attention to the fact that he was not promoted. He is an exceedingly good man, and he, in making his complaint to me, said, “The reason, I presume, that I am passed over is that I do not apply to members of [[Parliament|Parliament]]. I do not intend to do so, and therefore it is but right for me to send my report applying for promotion, because I contend that the clause in the manual about not applying does not apply in that way”, and he thought it better to apply personally, instead of through members of Parliament. I only say that is the feeling in the force, and I know it is. I do not know of any case of my own knowledge. When a man thinks he is due for promotion and is not promoted he looks around for some means of redress, and that naturally seems to be the member of Parliament for the district.
<span id="rc11074">[[#rc11074|11074]]</span> You do not know any glaring case as the result of political influence?— No, I do not; I do not remember any.
<span id="rc11075">[[#rc11075|11075]]</span> Within your own knowledge?— No.
''The witness withdrew.'' ....
=== Previous page / Next page ===
<br />
{{MicroficheCopy}}<br />
'''The [[Royal Commission report day 27 page 1|previous day]] / [[Royal Commission report day 29 page 1|next day]] . . . Royal Commission [[Royal Commission Index|index]]'''
[[Category:Royal Commission]] [[Category:April 1609]] [[Category:Royal Commission]] [[Category:Commisioner Standish]] [[Category:history]]
MediaWiki:Sidebar
{{^|Original page location \documents\RoyalCommission\RC810609_28_06_11064.html}}
[[Royal Commission report day 28 page 5|previous page]] / [[Royal Commission report day 28 page 7|next page]]
== The Royal Commission evidence for 9/6/1881 ==
''''''
=== full text ===
(see also introduction to [[Royal Commission report 9/6/1881|day 28]])
'''Insp William B. [[Insp Wliiam Montfort|Montfort]] giving evidence'''
<span id="rc11064">[[#rc11064|11064]]</span> In the 25th section the last clause says, “The Chief Commissioner may also, if he think fit, discharge him without assigning any reason.” Do you think that is just to the force itself; do you think a clause like that is likely to be of service to the police force generally?— It was put in as a sort of safetyvalve after that clause empowering the Government to appoint an outsider to a certain position in the force, if necessary. For instance, if it was necessary to appoint an officer in charge of the detectives, it might be necessary to send to London, to England, and it is only exercised in extreme cases; that power of dismissing a man without a reason has not, during my experience of twenty-eight years, ever been exercised.
<span id="rc11065">[[#rc11065|11065]]</span> It could be exercised with impunity against a man if there was nothing against him?— No.
<span id="rc11066">[[#rc11066|11066]]</span> ''By Mr. O'Connor''— Are you not aware that the late Chief Commissioner was appointed from outside the force?— Yes, but the Chief Commissioner joined in 1858, I think. He was appointed under the Regulations that immediately preceded these, of which those are a copy. Captain MacMahon was Acting Chief Commissioner immediately preceding him in the same way; but when I say the officers, we never look upon the Chief Commissioner as an officer; he is in a different schedule in the Estimates even. He is entered down along with the clerks.
<span id="rc11067">[[#rc11067|11067]]</span> Would it not be just as much against the interests of the men if any new regulations were framed that would debar a man from rising from the ranks?— Yes.
<span id="rc11068">[[#rc11068|11068]]</span> Anything new would tend to interfere with them?— Yes.
<span id="rc11069">[[#rc11069|11069]]</span> And therefore, if you studied the temper of the men, things should go on just as they are, land you would get officers of fifty, sixty, and eighty, eventually?— I do not think that is likely to be the case. I do not wish to criticise what is past, but I believe the retention of certain officers in the force has militated considerably against the promotion in the service.
<span id="rc11070">[[#rc11070|11070]]</span> ''By the Commission''— It was stated by Sergeant Steele that it would require [[Police pay and Conditions|political influence]] for a man to raise himself in the force — is that the general feeling in the force?— Yes, it has become very much so of late years.
<span id="rc11071">[[#rc11071|11071]]</span> That is the feeling among the men?— Yes, some men will not resort to it.
<span id="rc11072">[[#rc11072|11072]]</span> Have any been appointed apparently through political influence?— That I do not know—I was not in a position to know what influence was brought to bear on the Chief Commissioner.
<span id="rc11073">[[#rc11073|11073]]</span> Might that not arise from men hoping to be the next, and fancying they should be?— It might be very likely. A man came to me when I was in charge of No. 1 division and asked to see the superintendent, and wrote a report, calling attention to the fact that he was not promoted. He is an exceedingly good man, and he, in making his complaint to me, said, “The reason, I presume, that I am passed over is that I do not apply to members of [[Parliament|Parliament]]. I do not intend to do so, and therefore it is but right for me to send my report applying for promotion, because I contend that the clause in the manual about not applying does not apply in that way”, and he thought it better to apply personally, instead of through members of Parliament. I only say that is the feeling in the force, and I know it is. I do not know of any case of my own knowledge. When a man thinks he is due for promotion and is not promoted he looks around for some means of redress, and that naturally seems to be the member of Parliament for the district.
<span id="rc11074">[[#rc11074|11074]]</span> You do not know any glaring case as the result of political influence?— No, I do not; I do not remember any.
<span id="rc11075">[[#rc11075|11075]]</span> Within your own knowledge?— No.
''The witness withdrew.'' ....
=== Previous page / Next page ===
<br />
{{MicroficheCopy}}<br />
'''The [[Royal Commission report day 27 page 1|previous day]] / [[Royal Commission report day 29 page 1|next day]] . . . Royal Commission [[Royal Commission Index|index]]'''
[[Category:Royal Commission]] [[Category:April 1609]] [[Category:Royal Commission]] [[Category:Commisioner Standish]] [[Category:history]]
MediaWiki:Sidebar
{{^|Original page location \documents\RoyalCommission\RC810609_28_06_11064.html}}
