ARE THE POLICE OVERPAID?

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2133, 16 July 1907, Page 2

ARE THE POLICE OVERPAID?

THE LABORER’S HARD LOT. AN EXHAUSTIVE COMPARISON. Traversing an article recently published in tli e “Times” regarding the pay of policemen “Observer” writes: 1 read i n your issue of the 9th instant, an article dealing with the payment of the police. Of course I am not going to object to tile police, or any others, getting an increase of pay: but what I am going to take exception to is this —putting the policeman on a par with the laborer. The article quoted says: “A laborer earning his living with pick and shovel can command from 8s to 9s a day. but the guardian of the law must be content with the princely wage of 7s per day.” Sir, the policeman who receives 7s per day draws £2 9s per week, for he gets paid for seven days per. week, which is Is more than the- laborer with his 8s per day, even supposing that the laborer puts in a full week, for very often on acount of wet weather and other things the laborer loses sometimes half a week, which reduces his income considerably. The policeman, on the other hand, has no lost time, no matter whether the sun shines or the rain comes thick and fast. The laborer, when he falls sick, or meets with an accident, not only loses his nav. but has to pay all his own expenses. The policeman, oii the other hand, if he fall ill, his pay goes on all the same. The laborer, when ho moves from one town to another, is compelled to pav all his own expenses in connection therewith, and. very often he is put to a lot of inconvenience and expense. The policeman, when he goes from one town to another, is sent at the expense of the country, and should he bo a married man, his furniture is not only packed but also shipped at the expense of the country, and his pay going on all the time. The laborer, when he has a holiday, not only loses liis wages, but has to pay his own expenses. The policeman is allowed so many holidays per year, and does not lose anything. The laborer wears out a lot of clothes, and is compelled to get them at tli© cheapest rate possible. The policeman, on the other hand, wears out ver few clothes, and when you meet him in

mufti you will see that ho is wearing a nice tailor-made suit. The laborer is compelled to pay his own rent, and very often on account of his earnings being small, and sickness in the family, is found living in a place not quite fit for human habitation. The policeman lives in a nice house, and has his rent paid for him, and when ho gets too old to do any more duty he receives a pension for the remainder of his life. The laborer, on the othor hand, when he becomes too old or feeble to do any more work, gets the sack, and, provided he has not reached the age of 65 vears has to depend on his family or the charity of strangers. I have heard of one policeman, who, when lie is sent to another town up North, goes to stay with his people and pockets his expenses. Truly, sir, the lot of the policeman, as compared with the laborer, is a very hard one indeed! The policeman receives a regular salary, while the laborer receives only the pittance for the time he puts in, and sometimes he is even cheated out of that. Sir, I feel that the Post has exaggerated somewhat on the question of rent, when they say “from £6O to £7O per year,” for £6O would come to over £1 per week, and I don’t sec how a man getting £2 9s per week could afford to pay such a high rent.