these offences.
May
be
Besides I still maintain that there are cases in which it might be against the interests of the Force to allow the matter to be taken into Court, or in which a prompt punishment such as dismissal is urgently needed, and would meet the justice of the case.
The contention between the Council and the Capt. Supt. is simply this: If a complaint by a member of the public against a member of the Force is made, he should not investigate it and decide it, but should at once refer the party aggrieved to the Police Court to take out a summons.
The Council requires him to investigate the case and to deal with it as the circumstances and justice thereof require.
A regulation passed by the Executive Council does not go beyond this, and has not imposed on him any duties or powers incompatible with any law.
With respect to the last paragraph of the Capt. Superintendent's letter, I am still of opinion that the discipline of the Force would be endangered if the members of it knew that the interference of the head would be limited to and take the form of sending the offender before a Magistrate.
The offender might have good reason to believe that the party aggrieved would not prosecute or that he could be intimidated or prevented from appearing against him.
In the third paragraph of the Memorial, the Capt. Supt. states that he would not have memorialized the Secretary of State if he had not considered the Regulation somewhat severe.
I do not quite understand what he means, but I protest against any insinuation as to my reasons for the opinion I have given in this matter.
They