THE KELBURN RAID

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 223, 8 June 1918, Page 8

THE KELBURN RAID

Sir,—The judgment in (his case has now been given, .and as the affair had, like a number of other cases, almost vanished from the public mind, ]. wa3 loath to I'efer to it because of the need--less publicity that has been given to those connected with it. When in Auckland my attention was arrested by at scare heading over a Press Association telegram, and not only was the judgment referred to, but the paper nuisb give a recital of the charge and the names of the accused, some of whom, is was shown at the outset, had 110 charga to answer. Therefore, as the papers have not been sparing in their reference to the names of the females connected, with the affair, and in a measure have revived the morbid curiosity of the pub-' lie, I t'nel justified in referring to certain, features which may apply in cases of a similar nature. You have thought the caso sufficiently; important to justify a lender in your,' issue of June 5. You state that no reason; will appear for regretting the extent to which attention has been drawn to tlia case if the result is a stirring of the public conscience. With that sentiments I in a measure agree, but I do not think' the undue publicity you have given to the case will servo any good purpose, and I am surprised that a paper such as The Dominion claims to be sliould have given such a. lengthy recital of the tietails' of the evidence adduced.

There is much in your leader to commend it, but I think you lay too muclr emphasis on the guilt of the women. Surely it can be held that the men who" frequent houses of ill-fame are equally guilty in carrying out the purpose foK which the house exists, as the Magistrate said a house pf ill-fame could not exist without the men.

There is, of course, a vast difference between a procuress and a keeper of a,' house of ill-fame who hunt for the precious life of those who merely pay visits to such, houses and sometimes under unsuspecting circumstances. In. this caso all the women found on tho premises were treated alike by the police, while the men were allowed to go free. This in spite of the fact that the men apparently could have been prcsecutivl under the Justices of the Peace Act. 1 The police, to my mind, have acted in a very unfair manner, and surely their action did not call for the congratulations of the Rev. Mr. Archer. One would: think that Mr. Archer looked with relish upon the fact that these unfortunate females have 'received imprisonment. Surely it is quite enough- that tbev received the penalty of the law without a professing Christian minister expressr ing his pleasure. In contrast to that I am at a loss to> understand the attitude of the police. It was stated that they had witnessed acts of misconduct in January last. If such did take place, surely a better waywould have been tot have given the occupier of the house notice to leave or prosecuted her immediately, and to hava advised the guardians and friends of tho other girls of the position.. If such, action had been taken there might have been grounds for congratulating ths police in preventing a great deal of what they said took place. The closing up of the house would have at least kept the unsuspecting from the danger. Then I fail to see why your paper should publish the names in instances of this sort until those apprehended are actually convicted. It is' time tlmt the community dealt with the men and women alike. Make it a condition that a man found in a house of ill-fame be given the same publicity and punishment as a woman,-Then, most of the men would be too coward'}' to take the risk of arrest.—l am, etc., S. C. BAPON. Melling, Lower Hutt, June 7, 1918.