Mataura Ensign GORE, FRIDAY, APRIL 6, 1883.

Mataura Ensign, Volume V, Issue 244, 6 April 1883, Page 2

Mataura Ensign GORE, FRIDAY, APRIL 6, 1883.

';4-^EoisipN'pf considerable importance recintly given by his Honor Judge Co|>e/in the County Court, Melbourne. "A police constable named Maguire was siied for damages for slander ,by one "\JFilliam Silk, who alleged that Maguire' called upon and informed his emp;loy§r that he^Silk) had served a term of imlrisonnaient 'for some petty crime ; the information resulting in his discharge. The defence set up by Macounsel was that the statement Jhade to Silk's employer was true. His •Honor, however, ruled that Silk, hayhiß sentence for the offence '^M^uitibki..;.',,'*. ■ ■■■■ -. '■ ■

he had Mffii|;^4>p a free man and that MagUira's fe|£tement was action- ; a^l^> ¥^^|co^!4glj\^ve a verduy^ £op r^he^plain^iff.,^j fin i 0 •jiiidg^ top^Bi decisionMwill, we f^el ! confident, meet with the approval \6& all who desire the law, to be so administered that a prisoner upon his release will not have his chances — which at! best are so poor — of obtaining employment and returning to a life of usefulness upaet by vicious or meddlesome persons, whether they be police constables or civilians. Evidence taken some three months back, before a commission appointed by the Victorian Government to enquire into the working of the police force, showed only too clearly that the custom of calling upon the employers of released prisoners and recommending their discharge was systematically pursued by certain members of the Melbourne detective force, their object apparently being to get the hunted down men completely at their mercy, after which they were utilized ' for me nefarious purpose of concocting robberies with other criminals, and furnishing such information as enabled the detectives to seize their comrades in the act of committing the crime. While we can readily conceive of instances where it would be the duty of the police to put employers of criminals upon their guard, we hold that the indiscriminate exercise of such warnings would be wholly indefensible. The following of a course of this kind, without taking into account such considerations as the person's antecedents, the magnitude of the crime for which he had suffered imprisonment, and the probable genuineness of his desire to lead a reputable life, could only result — as was the case in Melbourne — in a large increase in the ranks of the more abandoned and hopeless class of criminals. There are few people who, have had any experience of the world without knowing instances where persons, possessing no criminal propensities, were led into the commission of crime by exceptional circumstances, from a recurrence of which their after lives were free. We maintain that the existence of even a possibility of such persons being systematically hounded down is a disgrace to our civilization. In giving increased publicity to Judge Cope's decision we are in no way actuated by a desire to extend to habitual criminals a too soft sympathy. We are but aiming at rendering a merciful justice to those unfortunate persons who, by some single,insignificant crime, .have left themselves open to the attacks of malignant slanderers and over officious police constables.