THE POLICE. ROYAL COMMISSION OF ENQUIRY

Evening Post, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 11, 13 July 1909, Page 4

THE POLICE. ROYAL COMMISSION OF ENQUIRY

ME, ARNOLD GIVES EVIDENCE. STATUS OF COMMISSIONER DINNIE. [by -telegraph — pncsa association.] DUNEDIN, 12th June. At • the outset of the sittings of the Police Commission, Mr. Bishop said he would ask Mr. J. F. Arnold to give evidence on oath, prefacing ifc with any statement he wished to make. In the course of his remarks, Mr. Arnold said that during the past week he had received scores and scores of anbnymous letters, either signed with a noni de plume or with no signature at all. During his travels recently lie had conio to the conclusion that the police force had not the confidence of the public, and that confidence in the force was gradually becoming less. There was an 'under-current of unrest among members of the force. After Commissioner Dinnie had made a, couple of intei'ruptions, Mr. Bishop said : "I do not recognise your status at all except in respect to charges made against yourself personally." Mr. Arnold said he did not understand Mr. Dinnie was present to crossexamine witnesses. Mr. Bishop said that raised an important question. Clearly the Police Department was on trial. Therefore the Minister, as head of the department, was on his trial politically, and it seemed to him (Mr. Bishop) that, as tho permanent head of the department must necessarily have some reflections cast upon him, it would be only common justice thai/ he should have <he opportunity to clear up any matter as the enquiry went on, by putting questions from material in his possession. MR. ARNOLD'S EVIDENCE. Mr. Arnold stated that it had been said that men had been received into' the foi-ce without due enquiry into their character. He would mention cases by number. No. 1 was a man concerned in a street assault case in the streets of Wellington recently. No. 2 left England in company with his wife's sister, came to New Zealand, and joined • tho force. The deserted wife marie enquiries, and it was discovered that he was living with her sister, and by him she had two children. He was found at Lower Hutt. No. 3 came from England, joined the force, and went to Auckland. He was transferred for fighting, and then' cleared out with a married woman. No. 4 was a man who had been working in the tram service. He was dismissed from the tramway service in one of the cities for making an immoral suggestion to a lady passenger, and he joined the police force. No. 5 had been in the Glasgow Police Force, and was dismissed for assault/ on a sergeant. He came to New Zealand and joined {he force. No. 6 was .represented to him as -being a most extraordinary case. He was an Australian," un'd a notorious thief. His photo' and his -finger-prints were in ■posses§ion of tho Police Department in New Zealand. Mr. Dinnie said the man's photo, but not his finger-prints, was in the office. , Mr. Arnold : Well, his photo, and someone — I understand it was Detective CasEells— was at the window looking at this photo, when he recognised tho person on the beat opposite the station. No. 7 was a man. who came from Australia. While 'an assault was being committed on other members of the force in Wellington this constable (in plain clothes) was amongst the crowd urging en the civilians as against the force. There was a circular forbidding members of tho force to apply for outside situations without first obtaining the sanction of the Commissioner. That caused greafc feeling. He suggested that Commissioner Dinnie would clear this matter up. Then there was the case of Constable Pr.tton, who applied for thirty-six days' leaye of absence to go to Australia to get married. He was only entitled to 29 days' leave,- and the extra seven days were refused. Later, thirty-six days' leave was granted but sevon days' pay was stopped. Members 'of the force certainly believed another person whom Sir Joseph Ward had named had been granted she months' leave od full pay to go to Great Britain to get married. Sir Joseph had said this m amber had been given one month's pay. Ho (Mr. Arnold) understood that in consequence of certain criticisms published in a .newspaper, authority for leave of absence to this member had been altered from six months' leave on full pay to six months' leave with one- month on full pay. ' Mr. Arnol.d then referred to the question of examinations and went on to deal -with the ■ cast of a constable stationed up north. He was -charged by another constable of robbing a drunken man. An enquiry was held, and whatever the commissioner thought, constables believed the case had been proved up to the hilt, but the person supposed to nave <ommitt«d the robbery was promoted and transferred to a more impoitanfc position clown south. He pre- , ferred not to come south, and he was sent further north, while the constable who made the charge was sent into the back-blocks on tht Main Trunk line, and on his protesting was severely fined. SYSTEM OF PROMOTIONS. '[he system of pi emotions caused as much/vieeling in the force as perhaps anything else. One regulation was considered very unfair. It was, tbat clerks in the Police Department, having ten yeais' service, might be promoted to be fcrgeants on application. It gave ' rise to much feeling that the clerical staff should bo placed upon a different footing from the mpn doing the active, practical work of the force. He quoted instances. '"A" was promoted to sergeant on. Ist March, 1905, when 111 a certain district up North he had been transferred on account of being mixed up in a drunken row in which a young man lost his life. He was transferred to Auckland, and had since been promoted to the position of sergeant, over 116 senior constables. "B" joined the force on let July, 1909 (?o), and was promoted on Ist October, 1906, when there were 273 men scnior< to him. "C" joined on Ist April, 1903, and was promoted on Ist Apiil, 1909, to sergeant. Another man, v, ho joined a year before "C," had been passed over, although he had done extraordinarily good work. > "D" joined in 1897, and was promoted on Ist April, 1906, over the neads of 182 seniors "E" joined on 16th January, 1898, arid waeMpromoted in 19p8, over '221 seniors. "F" joined on 15th June, 1896, and was promoted on Ist April, 1909, over 140 seniois. "O" joined on 15fh June, 1896, and was promoted on 16tl* March, 1909, over 139 seniors. "H" joined on 13th September, 1890, and was promoted on 15th l'Vbiua^y, ' 1909, over 100 seniois. "I" joined on 14th November, 1895, and was promoted on 15th Febjuury, 1909, over 136 senior*.

"J" joined on 10th October, 1891, and was promoted on ls>t July, 1908, over 108 seniors. > "X" joined on 18th April, 189G, and was promoted on 10th June, 1903, over 154 seniors. "L" joined in. December, 1898, and wts promoted in December, 1907, over more than 200 seniors. There was an examination, the passing of which was supposed to help constub'ds in inomotion. .Numbers of those promoted never passed the examination and others who passed it never had heen promoted. WHAT SHOULD BE DONE. *Mk Arnold went on to outline what should be done to re-habilitate the force. First, the larrikin element must bo removed, the right class of men must be indued to join,' and to do this the conditions must be made 1 such as to attract such men. He thought the men were insufficiently paid, and that tho pay of constables joining should be increaoed by Is per day, and there should be a ripe* all round. He thought tho standard of education was too high. 'POLITICIANS AND POLICE. The question of political interference then cropped up, and in reply to the Commissioner, Air. Arnold said if a complaint was made to him about a constable he would ees his superior officer. ■Mr. [Bishop : 'Would you communicate direct with the Minister? In going through the file the othei day I found no less than three letters from a member of Parliament addi-esFed to the 'Minister forwarding complaints to him .by constituents with regard to individual constables. Commissioner iDinnio : 1 am not supposed to answer a member of Parliament. Tho answer must go thrciigh the Minister. 'Mr. Bishop: Is that to? 'Mr. Arnold: That is quite true, not only as to the police, but all the departments. If a complaint was made to me I would probably sco tho inspector, but I would not write to the inspector. If I did it would go to> the 'Minister. Chief Detective Hcrbeit said he considered he had a grievance with regard to past promotions, and the present system as to the claims of detectives compared with those of the uniformed police. Mr. Bishop said '"as no on© was ready he would adjourn until to-morrow.