The Daily News. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1904. THE EMPLOYMENT OF THE INFORMER.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVI, Issue 246, 21 October 1904, Page 2

The Daily News. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1904. THE EMPLOYMENT OF THE INFORMER.

Several charges of sly grog-selling which were heard at Paeroa last week were, as usual, based chiefly on the evidence of informers acting 1 under police direction. Three rases' were substantiated, and when in-' dieting duo penalties the Magistrate 1 is reported to have said that he did 1 not sympathise with informers, than' whom there' was nothing lower, and that, had there not. been other con-! flrmatory evidence, he might have viewed the case in question in a , different light. Words to the same! effect have become an almost stereo-' typed formula of magisterial comment on such evidence, and this fact ( suggests sioime criticism on the mor-j ality and expediency of police metht ods in the prosecution of these _ taees. • , Putting aside as far u s pes-' I Bible the almost instinctive antipaI thy which is naturalfy felt aga : nst dirty agents and devious methods, let us consider the subject from an impersonal; point of view, and see what is to be said for and against the employment of the informer. On the part of the police it is constantly assert d uhat without suchi means it is practically impossible to pro . cure convictions for sly grog-selling. j That this is also the belief of the Do-' partment of Justice ia evidenced by! its endorsement of police methods,! and by the further very material fact that it provides the police with 1 money fon the payment of their creatures. In one of the Paeroa cases Constablo Bevan is reported to bavej said that he was ''employed by the I Government to detect aly grog-sell-ing," at a remuneration of eight shillings a day. The second inforn,er supplemented this with the state-' ment that he had come into the dis- ' trict by arrangement with Tnspec't- • or Cullen. It may, then, be taken as established that the Department! of Justice employs, or sanctions ths employment of, agents, the evidence! of whom, magistrates and judges ac-; cept doulbtfully, and comment on' with contumely. Before it can bo' admitted that there da justice or expediency in the use of such means to the enforcement of the law, it is necessary to examine the police postulate that such services are indispensable. In the case against James O'Shaugnessy, of Karangahake, ether evidence was called to prove ttiat in the short space of two months tho accused had received consignments of 272 gallons of beer and four rases' of spirits. Tho receipt by an unlicensed person of this abnormal quan- : tity of liquor is in Itself, of course, no offence against the law, but to any mind free from quibble it would ap- . pear to afford abundant presumptive evidence ol illicit trading. But unfortunately the administration of the law is largely influenced iby quibbles, and experienced police officers obviously did not regard O'Shaugnessy's consignments as sufficient to warrant a prosecution with any prospect of success. That they were right in their presumption is a matter of li-itle doubt. However wore • they to proceed in older to prove a contravention of the law that they were morally certain was in continuous progress ? Manifestly it is not feasible for a well-known police officer personally to secure evidence of an illicit sale in a private house. H» ; ;s dealing with of devious ways, and is driven by the exigencies of his position and duty to resort to such other means as experience and expediency suggest. He must obtain evidence of a sale before lie can apply for a conviction and so maintain the observance of the law. In a multitude of ways his direct efforts Can be defeated and set at nought. He knows from a thousand circumstantial evidences that sly grogselling is going oin and yet before he can make those evidences weigh in Court ho must 'be ablo to adduco direct sworn proof of at least one act of sale. He may suspect what ho likes, and allege within limitations, but on him lies the onus of proof. Feeling his impotence, and defeated at every turn by the vigilance of the law-breaker and tho antipathy of the general public against private interference, he turns to the only rcsourco left to him, the employment of un informer—a more than dubious method, but one which it is necessary to remember fa directed against dirty devices for tho defeat of tho law and the demoralisation of tho peoplo. Tfrat, 'n fipei >9 Ml* argument for

present police methods. On the other side—the side of open and unexceptionable procedure—there are to lie considered first the natural repugnance o' moral minds towards anything savouring of treachery, a*4 secondly, the merely conventional and superficial deprecation of whatever seems to contravene tlie principles of fair-play. Regarding the former consideration there-'is room only for qualification—not for contenti|oh. It is good that a high standard of moral procedure should be maintaii'nied in public as in private life. Hut we have to be sure

that contemplation of ideal good does not grow into unwitting connivance at real evil. Rcgardinig popular notions of fair-play it is well to remember the old legal maxim,' that t'Jie public welfare is the supremo interest. Whatever tends to sap the foundations of public safety is to bo guarded against, and if need be countermined. There is no Eenso of public; morality or fair-play in those who seek to ■demoralise men and to subvert the law Tor their own selfish enjcfe.They are a social danger, and their designs must be do-, featod by the implements available. Tho fly .grog-seller is one of the worst j elements of this Boeial dangler. He is indeed a double offender, for not only does he demoralise the people, and defeat the law, but- he also makes an iniquitous profit on his vile traffc, and cheats the Govern-1 ment out of- considerable revenue aa well. He is comparable to the rab- j bit pest, which undermines and pollutes the farmer's fields and consumes his valuable pastures. And j juat fanner, witfilout Roving or admiri.ngv4.t9 .nature, uses the ferret to drivis his" enemy into tho day-! light, bo it must regrotfullt be admitted, may the Government be justified in employing one species of human vermin to hunt a worse sort intone open, where the law may deal with it according to Its deserts.! That judges and magistrates should so regularly impress upon the wret-| ched informer tJhe Strength of their personal and official loathing is mere work of supererogiatioo. Their contempt might go without saying. It; may, with no intention of offence,! bo added that the informer is tern-! porarily an employe*) of tho same do-1 partment as the judge ; and it is in' no wise eststantia) to a public compiehension' of the difference between their functions that the toJiigw- of any body should recurrently denounce tho filth of its fingers. Occasionally tho police are also taken to task, and even reprimanded. We confess that in reference to the purchase of iHiojuor from sly-igrog sellers such censure seems to us to partake largely of the nature of misdirected moral purism, and, inasmuch as it disheartens the police, to incur some risk of encouraging the law-breaker. Rough-and-ready common sense perceives a wide moral difference between the offering of opportunity to repeat an offence and the inducement to do an initial wrong. The sly-gBog" seller's offonco by the time it comes undor police cognizance has become a series, the opportunity to continue which is welcomed by the offender. Therefore no moral wrong is done him by the police, and as thoir agent is already necessarily base it is abBurd to be indignant on his behalf. But we, desire to make it clearly understood that, while deprecating too ready condemnation of police methods; we would, with the public at largo, be Unfeigiicdly glad if the. admliristratiion of our liquor laws could be efficiently carried on without resort to any questionable Instruments, If, however, the informer is an escential—a contemptible essential—to the duo enforcement of social order, judges and magistrates might be well advised if thoy leave to counsel for tho defence whatever measure of denunciation may bo considered due, and, for themselves, rest assured of public confidence in their ability to appraise justly every evidence) which, comes before them. Finally we must add that, in our opinion, the intentions of our police aro in the main honourable and dutiful'; and wo feel very sure that the methods thoy have at times to employ are quite as distasteful to them as to the bench. If such methods are indispensable the rs]>onsiibililty for.tlifcit fault rests: on tlefcctlve laws, and ttia remedy is certainly to bo found in more efficient legislation.