HYDE PARK MORALS

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 348, 8 May 1928, Page 9

HYDE PARK MORALS

INQUIRY TO FOLLOW RECENT CASE PERTINENT QUERIES IN HOUSE (Australian P.A.—United Service) LONDON, Monday. Police duties and morals in regard to Hyde Park were the subject of some pertinent queries in the House of Commons. Sir William Joynson-Hicks, Home Secretary, in answer to a series of questions, said that he realised that the arrest of Sir Leo Chiozza Money in Hyde Park raised a grave issue Hito which he was fully inquiring. Referring to the general question of police procedure he would show the cases to a committee now inquiring into street offences. He and the Police Commissioner were considering whether to hold a Court of Inquiry or whether the officers concerned were guilty of perjury, in which case it would he a matter for another court.

Sir John Davidson: Why use plain clothes instead of uniformed police? Is the police object to censor morals or merely to prevent annoyance to people using the park? Sir William Joynson-Hicks: Nineteen out of 21 of the Hyde Park police are not uniformed. It is not a question of morals. It is the police’s bounden duty to see that public parks are not used in such a way as to be an offence and a disgrace. Personal investigation showed that additional lighting would be extraordinarily useful.

The well-known writer and economist, Sir Leo Chiozza Money, and Irene Savage, were charged at the Marlborough Street Police Court with indecency in Hyde Park. Sir Leo denied the allegations of the police. Following Sir Leo’s evidence, the magistrate stopped the case, dismissed it. and awarded £lO 10s costs against the police.