The Argus at KellyGang 6/10/1882
ROYAL COMMISSION
Editorial
The Police Commission is still pursuing its wonderful career. So delighted are Messrs LONGMORE, HALL, FINCHAM, and their companions with their occupation that they appear willing to prolong the inquiry for ever, and yet we must submit once more that they have done enough. They commenced by marking for destruction four officers of whom, in their respective capacities, any force might be proud, namely, Messrs NICOLSON, HARE, SADLEIR, and Sergeant STEELE, and since then they have lost themselves in a labyrinth of detail. We do not say that an inquiry into the police force was not advisable, but we do unhesitatingly assert that an inquiry conducted by the Longmore Commission is at once ridiculous and mischievous. A wondering public may well put the question, has not the force been sufficiently demoralised, have not the commissioners sufficiently demonstrated their incapacity?
This week the commissioners have taken a new departure. A member of the criminal class sends in an accusation against the detectives, and the commissioners are all agog at once. The accuser, one PATRICK BOARDMAN, is taken under their protection, questions are put as against the detectives, and the ex-criminal has the satisfaction of witnessing one of the detectives reprimanded and ordered out of the room because a protest was wrung from him by the commissioners' procedure. Here, again, we must say that it may be advisable for the Government to have members of the criminal class examined as to their relations with the police, but if so the commissioners are not the men for the work. No more difficult and delicate task can be imagined. It could only be conducted satisfactorily by trained men, who have gained by experience a knowledge of the criminal character.
The astuteness of the professional rogue is only to be realised by the expert, and so with his plausibility, his power of mixing truth and falsehood in a tale which shall leave him an injured innocent. Not a wolf in the horde but can tell a story that, to the inexperienced, almost carries conviction with it – how he would never have broken into a fold or fallen into a trap but for the inherent vice of the watch dogs. That there may be truth now and then in some of the stories is the difficulty of the situation, and is the reason why, when inquiry is deemed necessary, the investigation should be made by strong capable, and experienced men. We know how Sir CHARLES GAVAN DUFFY fared when he made an amateur inspection of Pentridge, and listened to WEECHURCH.
The danger that the Premier of the day would be befooled was recognise at once. And he was befooled. Still more may we tremble for the consequences if criminals and semi criminals, with their wonderful ability in the way of "pitching a story against the traps," are to be made welcome by Mr LONGMORE and Mr HALL. These particular commissioners belong to the class of men who in the old days greedily accepted any statement provided that it was made against a witch. Anything commends itself to their minds if only it is told against some one in authority. The spectacle of such men listening with open mouths to all the stories the thieves and harlots of the towns have to relate would be a spectacle indeed.
Taking the case of BOARDMAN, we fail to see why the commission should give this man an opportunity of assailing the detectives. What is his own story? At the age of fourteen he was sent to the Reformatory for an act of criminal immorality. After he came out he "was wild and reckless", so that when he left for New Zealand he was reported to the local police as a man who should be watched. He obtained work, but he lost it because, as he says, the local police informed his employer that he was "a convicted thief and burglar."
If this story be true the Dunedin police acted injudiciously and unkindly, but the Victorian police are not to blame. Their duty is to inform their neighbours of the presence of Victorian offenders, just as it is the duty of the London police to report to us when habitual pickpockets migrate to our shores. BOARDMAN then visited the country districts, and earned his living on stations in New Zealand and New South Wales , without any alleged interference. But he came to Melbourne in 1877, and, as he says, "he fell into bad company, he was under the influence of liquor, and dazzled by the showy prospects held out."
He was induced to join in an attempt to rob a branch bank in Elizabeth-street.
Here his grievance is supposed to come in. It is that the affair had been betrayed to the police by one of the gang (as it had been), and that the detectives were in waiting to make the arrest (as they were). BOARDMAN'S theory is that the burglary was "a put up thing."
The case for the detectives, on the other hand, is that a series of burglaries were taking place in and about Hotham; that they came to an understanding with one of the men, effected the arrest, and broke up the gang. In any case it may be asked, of what has BOARDMAN to complain? He was keeping company with thieves, he went out to thieve, and he fell into a trap set for thieves. On the whole, the woes of Mr BOARDMAN bear a remarkable resemblance to those poured forth on all suitable occasions by Master CHARLEY BATES and the Artful Dodger. On the 20th September a full bench of magistrates made a long and searching investigation into the case of this interesting character, and they were so satisfied that he had a certain complicity with a hotel robbery at Hotham that they sentenced him to 12 months' imprisonment as a vagrant. Notice of appeal was lodged, and BOARDMAN is at large on bail. The commission has taken him into its confidence, and is practically reviewing the decision of the City Court in a case which is still sub judice. Would any other body of men so far forget propriety?
The detective police as a matter of course must deal in spies and stratagems. They may go further than the public conscience may approve, and it is possible that an occasional investigation would do good. But if there are mysteries, the Longmore commissioners are not the men to be entrusted with the task of probing them. Their connexion with BOARDMAN – with a man whom everything tempts to assail his accusers – is a proof in itself how utterly incapable they are of managing any such business. Such an incident is sufficient of itself to paralyse the Detective department, and it is said to have had that effect. We submit, therefore, that in the interests of society the Government should interpose, and prevent further and perhaps more serious mischief.
| ! | 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. |
