THE POLICE COMMISSION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 14220, 17 November 1909, Page 8

THE POLICE COMMISSION.

MR. BISHOP'S STRICTURES.

POSITION OF. MR. DINNIE.

OPPORTUNITY FOR : EXPLANATION.

[by TELEGRAM!,—- association.

j ? Wellington, Tuesday. ! To-day a deputation-of Wellington citizens, introduced by Mr. J. P. Luke, waited on the Minister for Justice (Hon. Dr. Findlay) with a request that the reply of Mr. Dinnie (Commissioner of Police) to the report of the Royal Commission on the administration of the police force be laid before Parliament. • •*■.' :■', :■■'.': ■"'•' ' ' i

The Rev. Gibson Smith was the. chief spokesman. The deputation, he said, had come to ask that full justice should be done to Police Commissioner Dinnie in regard to allowing him ample opportunity to give his own explanation #in face of the aspersions cast upon his administration in the report of Mr. Bishop, S.M. Mr.'•' Dinnie, he added, was a member of his congregation. He had seen confidentially a copy. of. Mr. Dinnie's reply, and the impression made upon him was. that he had a full and complete answer' to the charges made.

Mr. H. C. Tewsley said the Commissioner's .- report made <: remarks, about the police force, and he thought that in the interests of the commercial. portion of the community the fullest and earliest publicity should be given to the reply made by the Commissioner of Police.' -

Dr. Findlay, in reply, said he wanted to make it clear that Cabinet had not yet de cided anything in regard to this matter, but when the position was being considered tho fullest measure of fairness would be given to Mr. Dinnie. Anything that he (the Minister) said, therefore, was said as Minister and not in consequence of anything that had . been decided upon by his colleagues and Cabinet as a whole. 1 Without, for one moment suggesting that the observations made that morning were not fair, and made in perfect bona-fides, he still thought most of them proceeded upon a wrong assumption. . One had to go back to the beginning of the Royal Commission and to seek—first, how it arose; secondly, what its duty was; and thirdly,. what was the nature of its report. According to our laws certain charges were made gravely affecting the administration of the police force by Commissioner Dinnie. Those charges were made in Parliament, repeated in the press and repeated from the public platform. It was felt, and by no one more than Mr. Dinnie himself, that those charges seriously affected his reputation and his claim to the confidence of the Government and the police he controlled. In those circumstances he asked that an inquiry be made into the charges alleged. The Government asked Mr. Bishop to act as Royal Commissioner. He was the senior magistrate of the Dominion, a man of very high reputation, of great courage, of sound discretion and judgment, and a man against whose judicial career he did not suppose anyone would make any imputation. It was fair to state that Mr. Bishop was very reluctant indeed about accepting it. Looking at his qualifications, his acceptance was pressed upon him, and he consented from a 'sense of duty. "A Royal Commissioner," the Minister added, " has almost the power of a Supreme Court judge. He is expected to proceed according to the recognised canons of British impartiality, to hear both sides, to suspend his judgment until all that can be said by one aide or the other has .been said,, and as far as I know that course was followed by Mr. Bishop. Mr. Dinnie was afforded an opportunity at the close of the evidence of meeting the charges which had been brought .against him, an opportunity of which vou know he availed himself, and it must be admitted effectively replied to a number of the charges, and as far as I remember traversed the whole- ground on which the charges rested. Then the case having closed, Mr. Bishop took time to consider his report, and finally sent it to the Government. The point I want to make clear is this, that the report is not an exparte statement at all. It is in the nature of a judgment of a high judicial officer. By accident the Royal Commissioner was a magistrate and not a judge of the Supreme Court, but the full force of what I am suggesting to you will be apparent. It has been pointed out that Mr. Dinnie's reply was not laid upon the table of the House,' and for that lam responsible. According to the constitutional rules, as far as I know always followed, the report of a Royal Commission cannot be traversed by the person whose conduct has been investigated and that replv laid upon the table of the House. In this view the Solicitor-General concurs. That ample opportunity will be given . to Mr. Dinnie to answer in a way that is constitutional and right and proper the animadversions or comments made upon him you may be assured, but if you are going to allow the report of a Roval Commission to be traversed in any wav I take it no judge of the Supreme Court will for a moment accept the position of a Royal Commissioner. As to what Cabinet is going > to do in. the very peculiar circumstances with which it is faced, upon mv shoulders primarily rests the duty of advising the Government, and I am going to exercise that responsible duty as fearlessly as possible." .