Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 4934, 15 January 1877, Page 2

In connection with the or wont'of regulations, affecting the police force, We desire to make a.few r remarks on': a subject which 1 demands a, amounfcof attention, 1 espe-j cialiy/at.the.present juncture,(when there •-ii'.'a ;projipect of .alterations being'.made;; in'-the whole, system.-That is the want, of a: special ; fund, to be set apart: for the purposej of defraying; certain' expenses mevStably-in-: curred by policemen at times in the 1 ordinary! ' discharge rof their* duties. /It freqiieritly hfep-l pens that when dealing with rough characters) .they have their, clothes pretty well torn from' their ; backs ; yet .they are in :no wsj' compen- j sated for the damage, unlesslthe offender hap- i pen*to, be in a position to pay;such'fine as f;be< Court may think fit to impose, which very sel- i dom occurs. A case recently transpired ■ in which a constable was sued for the "amount* of ; damage done to a cab .he hired on a certain occasion for the purpose of .conveying an excited and rowdy, inebriate to the station. Nothing can be said of the merits of that case, it being still sub judice, but it illustrates Ifche point to which we have drawn. attention.; )Itahows,'in fact, that the policdman is frequently made tp bear a responsibility.he should not be»r. -He is paid—not extravagantly by the perform certain duties, and in discharging them hag to submit to kicks, cuffs, and general ill-usage. Now, aa Mr. Travers naively, remarked the other day, nobody would think any thing of a policeman being knocked about a .trifle, except perhaps the constable himself ; but it appears hard that in addition to this he should

be subjected to personal pecuniary loss. These men cannot speak for themselves, and it is mete, therefore, when they have a real grievance, that it should receive recognition and exposure in some direction, with the object of securing for them an amelioration /of their condition, which in the. direction referred to above is admittedly unsatisfactory, not to say hard. No doubt some change for the better will be made. Anqtheb constitutional question. Really the thing is becoming monotonous. The Lyttelton Times of Saturday has the following : " The' question of prorogation of the General "Assembly now presents a new phase. An Extraordinary New Zealand Gazette, issued on the fifth day of this month, contains a proclamation by the Governor ' further proroguing the said General Assembly to Friday, the thirteenth day of April next.' Even this short document could not be,prepared without a verbal blunder. It addresses the members of the Legislative Council and of the House of Representatives as summoned to meet 'on the sixteenth day of the month of January next,' while in the recital in the body of the proclamation the Governor states ' I thought fit to prorogue the General Assembly of New Zealand to the sixteenth day January instant.' As the proclamation is signed "and issued on the fifth day of January, this month, it is evident that 'January next' is January 1878, and that ' January instant ' is January 1877, and that there is a discrepancy of twelve months between the'two statements' of time. The recital is right, and the address is wrong. We might also take exception to the correctness of the.statement of the Governor in the recital:—'Whereas on the thirty-first day of Oct. last, I thought fit to prorogue the General Assembly of New Zealand.' The document issued on that day in no way expressed any. thought or act of prorogation by the Governor. It was a commission, purporting to be by the Queen, authorising some persons named therein, of whom the Governor was not one, to prorogue the General Assembly. The Govern6r witnessed the issue of the document, but he did not in it express any idea of his own on the subject of prorogation, or authorise any act to be done, much less do it himself. The proclamation now issued wholly misdescribes the procedure of prorogation, if it were a prorogation at the end of October last. Had the Governor done what he nows says he did, no question would have arisen." We may allude to the matter in a subsequent issue.