SWAT THAT JURY!

NZ Truth, 15 March 1924, Page 12

SWAT THAT JURY!

Miss Baughan Whirls Her Duster And Truth" Cornea Within Its Sacred Orbit. In pursuance of her quarrel with the jury who convicted the late Daniel Mvi - ray of safe-breaking, Miss B. E. Baughan, social worker, continues to try. to prove that a "Truth" bill-board heading was partly — or even wholly — responsible for the jury's alleged error. A bill-board heading, for mechanical reasons, is a short-worded affair, and Miss Baughan does not deny that the fact that Murray was on remand— a fact not proclaimed on the bill — was made abundantly clear m the paper itself; yet she clings desperately to the bill-board heading m an attempt to prove that "Truth" is to blame for the kink that Miss B. says got into the jury (who no doubt would be quite willing to locate that kink somewhere else). "WHOLE-SOULED LIES." In order to show how thin ia the material on which Miss Baughan criticises "Truth," and m order to allow her to state the case for Daniel Murray and • for prison reform as she sees it, we publish her letter In full, with pauses for comment. She writes:—* Near Arthur's Pass, • March 2. *24. To tha Editor of *Truth," "Sir,— l hope that thia will reach you m time for your next Issue, for I want to thank you heartily for publishing my letter re Daniel Murray— so far as I can see, exactly aa I wrote "Now, to take your criticisms seriatim. First the -whole-souled lie or two. I am away m the mountains for a few days rest, and have no papers with me, but if you will read your version of my evidence at Murray's trial m the Lower Court, I think you will find that it quotes me as saying that I correspond with every prisoner m our prisons. [The words were "almost every prisoner."— Ed. "Truth."] I certainly said no such absurd falsehood. What I did say was that I had correspondents In nearly every prison, and that is true. A social worker gets well used to, being ( misrepresented, and this error was so absurd (there are about 1100 prison inmates dally m N.Z.) that I did not trouble to contradict it, particularly as I did not see it for some little time, not (with apologies) being one of Truth's' constant readers. In the light of what has since happened I very much regret, Sir, that I did not; write to you, even if late m the day, for, ln addition to other inaccuracies, , what I had to urge with some force m Murray's favor does not seem to have got Into your reporter's notes, and m the Supreme Court I was not allowed to say even so much as m the Lower, so that part of the evidence never came be- ' fore thejury at all." It may be interjected here that "Truth" has not corresponded on this subject with its Christchurch representative: but let it be assumed, for argument's sake, that he made an error m his reporting. If so, he evidently stands ln distinguished company, for, as our- interlineation shows, even Miss Baughan permits herself to mis-report our report The sum total of the lady's accusation—for the "other Inaccuracies" she does not specify — is that she was reported as saying that she corresponded with "almost cv f*y Prisoner," instead of which she said she had correspondents ln "almost every prison." This is the aggregate of the "whole-souled lies" about which Miss Baughan "has waxed so eloquent Such a storm ln a teacup, and all about Miss Baughan's corresponding habits, which are evidently the pivot on which the whole world vlncluding prison reform) revolves? It must be admitted right away that a wrong of real magnitude has diabolically been perpetrated. "PRISON SYSTEM INDICTED. Miss Baughan continues: — "As regards seven years for safebreaking, I cannot m the least agree that such a sentence would have been 'salutary.* Murray has never been charged with safe-breaking before; nothing bad (been stolen; and five years had been thought sufficient at the same session, for an offenoe against a little girl,— surely a far more shocking crime than the breaking of twenty safes. Moreover, seven years In prison would have meant seven years of life without any normal experiences, such as none of us can develop properly without—seven years without intercourse with children, women, the sick, or dependents; without the spending or management of money; without need for self-reliance, responsibility, discrimination, judgment, choice. That is what prison life, even at the best, really entails, and how it can ever be supposed to turn bad citizens Into good, by itself, is much more than i can understand, 'Salutary,* did you say, Sir? I only wish that everyone who orders prison life for others had first to undergo a six months* term himself. That some individuals unhappily aro quite unfit for normal society I know alas to be only too true; these do require segregation. But for crimes against property only, surely fine, restitution, probation would be a far better method — especially if 'probation' were made to Include 'character training.' As regards the bill-board heading, I don't think I need say much as you practically admit my point, which is that Murray was widely stigmatised as an habitual criminal before his real trial, when really he had ceased to be a criminal at all. And I fear all average men are Influenced by such Press-reading, Sir. I don't see how they can well help it, being but average men. And most juries, I fear don't contain many men above the average. Then they a.'c not worth their salt! Well, we have no kind of guarantee that they are, have we, Mr. 'Truth?'" PROHIBITION IN A NEW FORM. Miss Baughan's point, if she has one, is that the bill-board swung the Jury, which of course is too absurd to be admitted. Hor contempt for the average man is understandable. She proceeds to her first logical conclusion, that publication of evidence should not precede the final hearing. Her line of argument is clear enough, viz.: That no report is a fair report until It has been approved hy Miss B, and as Miss B is not übiquitous, then reporting must cease. This now edition of the prohibition policy is thus set out: "Comment before a trial is concluded is, I believe, not allowed. It seems to me that the publication of evidence should not be allowed either, when the case is sent on to the Supreme Court; particularly whon so much is left out, as it was m this case, by many papers besides 'Truth. 1 "I find that quite a number of people knew nothing of Mr. XX'b existence, yet he was repeatedly mentioned ln the Lower Court, being (then) of some interest. If Dan Murray and Jimmy Twoshoes (let us say) had been children, and a window had been broken, and both had bo.n seen m a place where stones abounded, and Inter both had been seen contemplating the window — about to be broken; If, after the event, Jimmy Twoshoes was nowhore to be found, while Dan Murray remained oxtremely m evidence, would you not say, Sir, that you would like to have J. Twoshoos produced before you could properly assess th" blame But D. Murray wis found with a stono m his pocket. Well, J. Twoshoos might been found with twenty, and he or others mlaht havo slipped tho incriminating pebblo into Murray's outside pocket simply to put tho bia mo on Murray, which is what I boliovc was done. '

"Nursery or school justice would, I am certain, not have saddled Murray with the whole guilt on such evidence, yet publio justice (?) did. "About 'Scandal': I did not use the word with reference to thia case only, Sir, but with regard to the kind of truth' your paper habitually records, Surely there are noble acta among us, worthy records, not only vile and squalid ones? Do the unsavoury scrapings of the police courts really represent our New Zealand life truly? There is a fearlessness and a kind of fair play too, about you, Mr. 'Truth,* which I for one salute, for I like fine things when I see, them;' But I'd like these fifty times better if they were used m the sense of what is noble and admirable instead of deplorable and shameful. I am certain, Sir, you don't like an omelette made of bad eggs. Nor do I like skill and courage used to purvey scandal. Can't you tell us of truths m science, art, remedial treatment, wholesome human dealing? Your paper could be a real power for the increase of these, if only it would. Yours r Faithfully; R. E. BAUGHAN." "Scandal," of course, ls "scandal" according to the tenets of Miss Baughan. Into that argument it is hopeless to go. But did "Truth" talk scandal when it attacked such public injustices as have been proved against the sawmilling companies? — to quote only one instance of many. Those companies would certainly reply "yes," because divulging of their affairs is scandal (or worse) ln their opinion; and ls Miss Baughan'a opinion any better than their**? We all like what we Ilka; we don't Uke what we don't like. It la this characteristic that proves that Miss Baughan has not detached herself so far from the common herd as she might imagine. We sympathise with Miss B and with the sawmilling companies, but we are quite likely to offend again.