EVIDENCE IN CHRISTCHURCH.

Otago Witness, Volume 23, Issue 2684, 23 August 1905, Page 17

EVIDENCE IN CHRISTCHURCH.

CHRISTOHURCH, July 21. The Police Commission opened its si&» linos here to-day.

Inspector Gillies (Christchurch) said thestrength of the Police Force in that citywas five sergeants, 37 constables, five detectives, and one matron. The beats in the city were 11. The me., went out at 9 p.m., and were on duty till 5 the next morning. Sergeants were instructed to visiteach constable at least three times, and to make as many surprise visits as possible. The system of giving charge of court cases to the sub-inspector and the chief detective in their several branches had worked well. Witness thought the sub-inspector had 100 ■ much to do, and had not enough time to inspect stations. The duty of station sergeants might be extended, to relieve the sub-inspector. Eighteen months ago the beats had been shortened in consequence of complaints of their length; but no complaint, had beer, made since. The citywas insufficiently staffed, and he thought 10 more constables were wanted. He h*# heard a hint that M'Donald, whUe in <♦» force in Chvistchurch, had been guilty of stealing fruit from a shop. He had nyule inquiries, and found the story to bo *W>lutely untrue. H- had ngver heard ai}* other charge of theft against the force In Christchurch. Both sergeants and -Vi.istables were doing their dub* wall, ?.n-l were anxious to do it.

9bb-inspeeto; Dwyer corroborated Inspector Gillies* evidence, but said it was true thai M'Donald had been caught stealing fruit in Christchuruh, and had topay for it.

Se-geant Donovan, who had been in charge of the night section in Dunodin from January, 1904, to June, 1905. affirmed it was untrue that he had madeappointments with certain constables. He had reported more men in Dunedin than all the other sergeants put together. He had not reported men instead of arresting" them. He had reported one constates who was 45 minutes from his beat, but ho did not know what punishment the man. got. He had been the first man to bringunder the notice of Inspector O'Brien tho broaching and stealing of grog placed in the lock-up and police stables. No inquiry was held, however. A constable had told him that another constable, since discharged, possessed a bunch of keys, with which he was supposed to bo entering: stores. He had given that information to the inspector. It was not his experience that Inspector O'Brien supported the sergeants rather than the men. Inspector O'Brien did not seem friendly disposed towards him, especially since he had given evidence aboui. tho grog. Witness had had no suspicion of men on night duty breaking into any of the warehouses "if there was a combination of two or th'-ee constables doing beat duty it would not be an easy matter to find oat what 'vaa going on. He never knew I hat che watch-

hpuse-keeper was in the habit of leaving ihe' station. There was, properly speaking, nobody- in charge of the station after the night sergeant had made his last .visit. ' The sitting closed early in the evening. A large number of sergeants' and constables gave evidence, all stating 1 that at the time M'Donald committed a theft of fruit here the matter was not generally known or spoken of. Only two civilians (Mr and Mrs De .Weston) gave evidence. They complained that the police had persecuted them, and had prevented being granted oldage .pensions and a second-hand dealer's license. Detective Ward gave evidence that the witnesses rented rooms io persons of bad repute. The Commission adjourned to the North Island. •, " ♦ AUCKLAND, July 28. Tlhe Police Commission commenced its sittings in Auckland to-day. The principal " witnesses were -Inspector Cullen, Sub-inspec-tor Black, Sergeants Hendry, Dew, and Eiheehan, all of whom gave an emphatic denial of ex-Constable M'Donald's assertion that Auckland was the worst of the whole lot in regard to thefts. * : Inspector Cullen said he considered that too much inquiry work was thrown on the ' Police Department by other Government departments. Auckland, he said, required, •15 more eonstabies und two extra sergeantß as the work here was heavier than anywhere else. He also 'thought the "work of the sub-inspector too much for on© man, Mr Black averaging 14 hours a day. WitBees worked on fairly cordial relations with Sub-inspector Black. All beats were arranged by witness. Sub-inspector Black said that the Auckland force was better supervised than in any Dther city in the colony. He knew M'Donald. While witness was at Chris*- ■ church he regarded him as a lairly straight j ttionesfc man, until just before his I (M'Donald's) transfer. The cause of his transfer led him to think that he was not jrcry straight. --"*" ,Mr Bishop: What was the cause? Witness : Being found getting beer from ' *n hotel. He went on to state that in "consequence of an anonymous complaint* lie and the inspector watched a hotel one day. He stood in a dark doorway and saw some constables go to a hotel window, one of them- reaching up to a window and getting some bottles of beer. They walked across the street, and by accident were about to enter the doorway in which he was6ecreted, when he stepped out and took the beer away from them. McDonald was transferred to Dunedin after ttiat incident, and he he was fined. Mr Bishop : Were you aware that he was almost more than being suspected* as a tHef? ~~ "Witness: No. Sergeants Hendry, Dew, and Sheehan all teid Auckland required, more .police, while all "the witnesses impressed on the commission the -necessity ior increasing the amount of_ pay, ."upon the grounds that the tetter the pay the better the men. 'Sergeant .Dew said that he was stationed in Dunedin 18 months -ago. In applying io the department for a. transfer "to Auckland He> «fcated the grounds as his wife's health, but -he hadanotherreason. He could not do r the work satisfactorily in Dunedin, owing to the i»reat length of the beats. It wae impossible to -do the -work. When Constable lyee complained *o the inspector about it he received > severe rebuff, .and witness therefore never tgok up the matter upon the grounds that he considered the constable's complaint just as much entitled to be inquired into as a sergeant's. Had three sergeants reported the matter, he did not ' believe it would have been considered. Be •was glad to get nway from Dunedin, because be never felt safe there. Sergeant Sheehan stated that when he went to Waihia few years ago, things were very lax. When he tried to improve -them he met with considerable opposition on the part of the constables, who tried to injure , him. However, .they did nothing, and afterwards worked with him. ; It is expected several complaints by pri- : rate individuals will he placed before the Do^mmission on Monday. INSPECTOR v. SUB-INSPECTOR. ] AUCKLAND. July 30. I toomewhat sensational revelations wore umde before the Police Commission this ■ ' morning with regard to the relations exist- | l ing between Sub-inspector Black and In- , £ ipeetor Cullen. Wiben questioned yeste-r- s lay upon the matter, Inspector Cullen said 1 iat^ his relations with Black were fairly /Ordial. This statement, however, was re- -^ uted by Black to-day when the sub-inspec- r ■or was cross-examining Constable Dart, vho has passed Jlis solicitor's examinations o md was admitted to practice some months t igo. in regard to his suggestion that men n the force who had qualified as solicitors a hould be allowed to conduct Police Court v irosecutions. now undertaken by the sub- t nspector. Sub-inspector Black said : "Do r ou know that it has been represented that . am incompetent lo conduct cases in t Ouri;2" n

Mr Bishop: To what are you referring: Sub-inspector Black: To an officii memorandum which passed between th inspeotor and myself. Mr Bishop: Is the inspector dis«atisfie . with the manner in which you conduc cases? The Sub-inspector: Be stated in Octobe last that he considered I was incompefcej: to conduct casos in court, but I did ik know until three or four months ago tha such a report was sent in — until I applie fior a transfer, and the papers wet •attached. The President remarked that one of th questions raised by Sub-inspector Blac involved an important point in regard to th I general efficiency of' the force in Auckland It certainly, to his mind, went into th question of supervision and control genei ally when there was a line of cleavage i; the office. He inclined to think theought io thresh the matter out. Commissioner' Dinnie: I do not hesitat to say -that recently there has been a con siderable amount of friction, arising" per ■baps from remarks of the magistrates ii court. Nothing has been done seeing tha thi3 commission was formed. Mr Bishop:. lt was not formed when th< matter first arose, and it is by a men accident that this came .out. It had no: T>ean touched upon by Inspector Cullen oo Sub-inspector JBlaek in their evidence. I is a pity it should have become public ii this way without the. matter being thresh'ec out. I ! heard rumours of it in an indireel way, and asked the inspector and sub inspector how they worked with eacl oilier, receiving answers "which caused m< to leave the matter. But it cannot now remain as it is. Mr Dinnie: It will be dealt with at ai early date. Though we cannot say thest things -in public, it takes time to kno^ who is speaking +l >e truth and who is not. Sub-inspector ack: I was in hope; this matter of washing dirty linen woull not be introduced, and came here deter mined to regulate what I had to say bj what Inspector Gullen gave in evidence. He said we had got on fairly well. I said nothing, but now, in justice to me, the whole thing ought to be threshed out. There is a misconception. It was suggesfced that I was only reported incompetent, in regard to Police Court work, but Inspector Cußen gave as a reason that 1 I was incompetent and inefficient and unable to do my duties. My life was simply a curse to me here, and I offered to pay my expenses to any part of the colony, so that 1 could get away; so that I coufd do my duty with a chance of receiving common civility. So far as lam concerned, I have nothing to conceal. Since I came to Auckland I stuck to my duty night and day as well as I possibly could, and I firmly believe the whole thing is personal antipathy that induced him to make these reports. Mr Poynton : It certainly will be gone into, as it strikes at the root of things. Mr Dinnie : I had arranged to make certain changes in the fortx^ and it would have been a change in regard to the subinspector. Sub-inspector Black repeated his request that the matter be threshed out, and said if it went against him he was quite prepared to stand the consequences. Both members of the oommission intimated that they thought the matter was within the scope of the inquiry, and the discussion ended for the day, to be probably reopened on Monday. Evidence was then given by Constables Cotter and Lee, who were named by M'Donald as being the men who said that thieving among members of the Police 'Force also prevailed in other centres in the colony. Both witnesses denied ever having -written such statements, also their truth. Constable O'Grady said Miss M'Donald's statements at Oamaru as regards him were . deliberate lies. Constable Lee, whom M'Donald stated had written to Constable Charles Osborne at Dunedin, saying Auckland was the worst of the -whole lot, stated that he never wrote anything of the 'kind. He only wrote once to Charles Osborne about the men's fees. The Commissioners said inquiries made of Charles Osborne corroborated what Lee 3aid. The commission resumes on Monday niorning-. when, in addition to the CullenBlack episode, accusations by James Regan will be laid against the police. July 31. The Police Commission adjourned until the afternoon after receiving a number of complaints against individual members of the force. William Richardson, a prominent prohi- . bitiouist, wished to give evidence upon his | allegation that Inspector Gullen was responsible for two persons of bad character ' securing hotel licenses through favourable police reports. The President decided that the matter ,^was outside the commission's order ot reference. Commissioner Dinnie stated that the department would thoroughly investigate the matter. Jas. Kegan. who said lie had made an allegation against an Auckland constable, v. as informed by Commissioner Dinnie that the man had been transferred and dealt ' with by the department. ! Sub-inspector Black was called upon in the afternoon to substantiate the state- I ment which he made on Saturday morning

? with regard to the relations exi=tin il between himself and Inspector Cullen. lo With a \oluminous pile of notes in hi hand, Sub-inspector Black proceeded t ,] ( explain the situation, his remarks bein; ;t < listened to with the greatest of interest b; a large number of plain-clothes constable , r and private citizens, who crowded the smal | t room in which ths sittings of the com ,£ mission are being held. Sub-inspecto t t Black commenced by saying that afte: j acting in the capacity of sub-inspector a c Ohrislchurch for "a period of two years hi received notice of his transfer to Auckland That would be three years ago next Octo v ber. Having known Mr Cullen for som< considerable time, he did not anticipate i [ I particularly pood time of it under .hi* c I supervision. But although this was so, hi .. cam© here determined to carry out Mi v duties to the very best of his ability. I'oi the first eight or nine months all went well at least he thought so. and Mr Cullen fount no fault with him. The first unpleasant cess occurred between them. then. It aros« " through a report which he sent up to Mi " Cullen. Some days after it -was forwardec + the inspector came down to his office. Witness could see that he was in a temper. 3 He threw down the report upon witness's :, table, exclaiming, "What sort of a report is that to send to me?" "Well," sa;<i Sub-inspector Black, " I told him thai whenever be had any complaint to make against me he was not to swear at me. He denied that he swore at me. He said that it was not swearing at me. I told him that he did, and said that I >would not stand it." Continuing, Sub-inspector Black said that Mr Cullen then taunted him with being a subordinate, and was therefore bound to submit. After some further conversation, which witness could not give exactly, Mr Cullen went aivay. "The matter then remained in abeyance for a while. One day, when witness was in the inspector's office receiving his pay, Mr Cullen referred to the matter again*. He expressed his regret at what had happened, and said that he Avas a man who never bore any malice. " But." yaid the Subin&pector, "from that time I noticed that his 'manner had changed. It was different from what it had been before; but there was nothing with which I could exactly find fault with." Sub-inspector Black proceeded to stale that upon one occasion he found it neoessary to deny before subordinates a statement made by the inspector. Unpleasant relations existed for some time afterwards, and, matter:, growing worse, the inspector and sub-inspector ceased to be on speaking terms, except when business absolutely demanded it. At length matters oame to a crisis when the inspector declined to hear an explanation from Sub-inspector Black regarding correspondence, and ordered him out of his room as though he were a vagrant, dog, or the worst criminal in Auckland. Subirispector Black applied for a transfer, and subsequently reported matters Co the commissioner. Five months afterwards the application was returned, to which was attached a report from Inspector Cullen charging him with moompetenc-y, and giving the statements of magistrates to that effect. ■Sub-inspector Black said that had it not been for his self-control on one occasion there was no knowing what he might have done. The magistrates, when interviewed by witness, denied the assertions in Inspector Cullen's leport. A system of espionage prevailed in^ the force, and Inspector Cullen had shown him documents bearing on the careers of certain citizens, which Inspector Cullen had told him he would use when matters came to a head between these men and himself (Cullen). Inspector Cullen cross-examined the witness on several minor points, and will proceed with, the main examination tomorrow. August 1. At the Police Commission to-day the relations between Inspector Cullen and Sub-inspector Black were gone into, fho inspector cross-examining the sub-inspector , at considerable length. Mr Cullen . Did I not have occasion to I complain to you about taking a document away from :ay office without my knowledge, making an alteration in "it, and leturning ihe document? Mr Black : The only alteration I madj was simply altering the date. You erased it instead of making the correction with p;n and ink? — If I had committed a forgery you coald not have written i in stronger terms. I altered the date, and the additional words were not injurious. If th-eie had not been friction between u>3 you would not he*e found isult. Was it nob shown when you brought two constables before me for neglect of duty that ihoy had done a good day's work on the day they were charged with ncglectrig to be on the night reserve? — I don't think he was on duty all t 7 ay. The witness subsequently said ho thought the inspector let the man off because he was a favourite. Those are the only reasons you can suggest for favouritism?— There was not much j supposition about the matter. It was I common talk In the barracks. • The inspector cross-examined the witness t-> show that the man concerned was smarc and anxious to do more work than he was bound. Mr Cullen : You accuse me of having a system of cpioaag-o in the force; but will you give their Worships one solitary fact tj show ihU ?— That is an impossible quos-

g tien, became if men give information to the inspector they would not tell anyone 5 eke. 0 I£ I suspect things are going wrong, am g I not to inquire?— No man in authority y ough; to encourage these men. 5 Mr Poynton: Supposing drinking, thievLl ing. or gambling was on, would it - not be proper for him to employ means io r discover it ? r Witness : If he thought a man was doing t wrong he would be justified in finding out, b but it is wrong for him to encourage men to be a continual source of information '" concerning iheir comrades. 3 Mr Cullen : If you have eyes you must 1 have seen empty liquor bottles about the s barracks, and these must have been brought 3 in by tha mci. Was I not justified in 3 finding out and preventing it? — I don't "" know that you have ever tried. You havo ' rot discouraged drinking in the barracks. * When a man is going away the men have " a social send-off ; it is perhaps one night } in six months, for half an hour. J To tho question? of Mr Poynton, witness *■ said he had no desire to leave Auckland apart from his inability to work under Inspector Cullen, but if .foe were told by 3 seme persons in authority that so long as ' he remained in the service he -would have . to be under Inspector Cullen he would ' simply have to say, "I will leave." To do '' this, however, would be very much against j his inclination. , Mr Dinnie, Commissioner of Police, then questioned the sub-inspector. His first 1 query was: Do you think the disagreement " between Inspector Cullen and yourself has in any way affected the supervision of the force in th-e Auckland district? — Witness : I ' don't think it has. \ Do you think your grievance could have been settled satisfactorily by the department? — I have no desire for it to come before the public. I would have been satisfied to have left the matter in your hands if I had been left alone. Mr Kettle, S.M., also gave evidence, and described Sub-inspector Blactk as a capable, trustworthy officer. Inspector Cullen's evidence will be taken on Wednesday.