UNEXPLAINED DISMISSALS

Evening Star, Issue 12623, 30 September 1905, Page 2

UNEXPLAINED DISMISSALS

TEE JHJNE»I*T PGLJGE BOANPAJi. J [Fno* Qic* Pasuamsctabs BxtpstsbO WELLINGTON, September 30. Daring the djßcussion of the Police Eetimates last Oighf., the Leader of the Opposition brought under the Minister's notice the discharge of constables in connection with the recent Dunedin scandals. He said he had been given to understand that two | or throe constables were dismissed, and D 9 '■ reason given therefor. These men, he said, ' were simply asked to send in their resignation, and some of them felt their positions very keenly. There was one Wa.ker, in whom he was interested, as be came from his (Mr Massey's) district Walker said that he was branded for life, and took up the position—which the speaker thought was a very proper one—that he should be brought to trial, and if there was anything against him he would take the con; equences, but if not hjg character should be cleared. The Minister (Mr M'Gowan), in reply, asked Mr Massey if, as as of labor, he had never had occasion to dismiss a servant without giving, any reason ? Mr Massey: The cases w» not paralleL The Minister said they were- There were many reasons why, a policeman might not be suitable for his position, although he night not be a mm in whom any particular j lauit could be pointed out. \ Mr Buchanan: Tell him <so. Mr M'Gowan said the men knew this. Wl«it was wanted in the police was levelheaded men. They wanted, if poslble, to improve tbe police fore*. If the force was to be interferedt with for political reasons that could not be carried on*. In every } case of dismfcisal the matter bad been fairly , considered. He had explained to most of , these dismissed men when they had come to him why they had been duraksed. The policeman cotjld not be put in the same position as the ordinary CJvil Servioe «n----ployee, who could claim to be beard. It was more or less like tbe army, but be did not think it was necessary to appoint a notice board. If tbe chief of pottee were deprived of control' ever his men the discipline of tbe force would be endangered. There must be a head of the department, and he must be held responsible. He (Mr M'Gowan) was ready to bear anyone with a real grievance. No one was dismissed unless there was absolute proof that he was not » mm who should be » member of tbe Police Force. A man might be neither drunken nor dishonest, yet simply unfitted for tbe Police Force. That was why they had had some of the recent trouble. There were also men of long service and with good conduct who wanted to know why they were not'made serpeasta. To put the matter in a nutshell, they wanted brains in the Police Force.

Mr Bedford sai4 that the House had a ri"ht to know why there men had been d:s--irlflßed. Jf they were generally unfit that should be specified, without going any further, otherwise a specific charge, which the men had a right to be called upon to answer, should be laid. Mr Fisher said that the cases under notice were not ordinary dismiFeals, the men haying been dismissed after a series of serious charges had been proved against other constables, and tb*» men, being dismissed without season, would be associated with the transaction for tbe rest of their lives. He referred particularly to one man who had appeared before a committee recently, and who appeared in every capacity a desirable man. Mr Maesey thought that in every case where a. eenstab 1 © was dismissed good reasons should bo given. These men were dismissed at the some time *b those conrioted of theft, therefore in the minds, of the pn&ie a very serious injury was being dene to thee* roes. An opportunity should be given the men to dear themselves, smce it was impoecibJe for them to obtain employment while lying under this stigma. Mr Mass dedared that the policeman who got- most ease*, was looked npo» as the best, instead of the man who bad his district in order, and had decreased crime. The Minister repeated that the own had been discbawred by tha Oiromwoner. If tbe man Jyjd * erievapce he could come to the Minister. S» «wjd wrt interfere With th» lav. , „ Mr F=sher: Will you alter the law? The Minister said he was against altering the law. The ComwissioiJer couW dismiss a man without jrivrng reasons. Mr Massey said that he didnP* F?* *•» law to he nterhrtd with. What te ajked was whether the Jaw piajrented the Commifwioner {mm fJvimg Mf *«■*» f° r ™« discharge of these men. fte Minister indiested that he wan not ■juiiimsiil to interfere with the OommisUSer, and after Mr Hawkins had protested against power beintr giveß to an officer to dismiss a man without giving anyreason the nutter dwpnsd-