“Baume Did Not Receive Preferential Treatment While at Terrace Gaol.”

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18016, 29 November 1926, Page 5

“Baume Did Not Receive Preferential Treatment While at Terrace Gaol.”

HOWARD ELLIOTT’S ALLEGATIONS DECLARED UNTRUE BY MR RIDDELL, S.M.

Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, November 29. The report of Mr W. G. Riddell, S.M., concerning the Baume case, released for publication by the Minister of Justice (the Hon F. J. Rolleston) to-day, exculpates the Prisons officials in the matter of the Rev Howard Elliott’s allegations that Baume was given preferential treatment while at the Terrace Gaol or on the journey to Waikeria.

Mr Riddell refers to the fact that he had held that the objection raised by Mr Boyes, Elliott's solicitor, that a Magistrate had no jurisdiction in the case was groundless and records that Mr Boyes then intimated that he M ould take no part in the examination of -witnesses tendered by the Prisons Department. In regard to the allegation that Baume was allowed to wear civilian clothes and pyjamas, etc., the Magistrate reported that regulation 211 does not apply to offenders committed to a Borstal institution, but to ordinary prisoners. The evidence showed that Borstal detainees were allowed to wear their own clothes if transferred to a Borstal institution within reasonable time, and also that Baume was not allowed to keep his attache case in the celL Baume was kept apart from the other prisoners in accordance with the regulations, and he was required to get up and did get up at the same hour as the other prisoners, 6.30. Eggs and milk were supplied to him under the authority of Dr Gilmer, prison medical officer, and similar food was given to other prisoners when prescribed by that official. Five eggs were supplied to Baume in six days, but the chief warder denied that he acted as waiter and the Magistrate, accepted that statement. “ PLACED BY HIMSELF.” As a Borstal detainee, Baume had to be kept apart from other prisoners, and this was done. Baume was the only Borstal detainee in prison at the time and naturally was placed in the boys' ward by himself. The evidence showed that where a Borstal detainee was in prison, pending transfer, it was not customary to require him to do any work at the prison. The usual practice was carried out in Banme's case. It was also shown that Borstal detainees were not placed in ordinary prison garb whilst detained pending transfer, and that this practice was carried out in regard to Baume. Only three, not seven or eight Borstal detainees, were in the Terrace Prison on November 4, and these were not dressed in prison garb, but in hospital blues on account of the delay . in transfer and to prevent them wearing out their civilian clothes. *The only work they were required to do was to clean' the upstairs cell range which they occupied. Tha evidence showed that the allegation that another prisoner was detailed to make Baume’s bed was untrue. Mr Elliott, said that his experience of prisons, prisoners and prison administration had extended over eighteen years. The Magistrate remarked that if this was so it was strange that a man of his intelligence should be so ignorant of the difference between prison regulations and Borstal regulations. “ SOME ABE UNTRUE.” 44 After consideration of the allegations and the evidence in reply to them,” states Mr Riddell, " I lind that some are untrue, and that the other allegations are so trivial that no one with a knowledge of the regulations which apply to the different classes of prisoners, or has any idea of the value of words, would waste time in making them, and all are easily explainable when the circumstances surrounding Baume’s stay in the Terrace Prison are made known. “ It would have been more satisfactory if Elliott had appeared at the inquiry and produced the affidavits which he says conta'ned the allega-

tions published by him. Regardless of their truth or falsity, the fact “That he refused to appear and support the statements upon which he relied to show preferential treatment by prison officials, or to listen to their explanations in answer to his allegations, raises a strong presumption that ho did not know whether the allegations were true or false; that he took no reasonable precaution to verify them, and was not in the least concerned whether or not they reflected upon the honesty and integrity of the prison officials. “ Further comment is unnecessary. The result of the inquiry satisfied me that no such preferential treatment as alleged by Elliott was given to Baume, either yffien detained in the Terrace Prison or on the journey to the Waikeria institution, and that the prison officials treated him while under their charge in accordance with the regulations which applied to his case.”