THE SET AGAINST THE POLICE.
WE have noticed with genuine regret the attacks which have recently been made on the Metropolitan Police. On the particular case which has last supplied an occasion for
them, and is now the subject of judicial inquiry, we shall, of course, express no opinion. But however this inquiry may turn out, it will not lessen either the injustice or the unwisdom of the recent agitation. We grant that the police make mistakes, and that sometimes these mistakes are so stupid and persistent that it is difficult not to regard them as wilfuL But we do not see that these concessions in any way affect the character of the Metropolitan Police as a body. Indeed, it is very strong testimony to that character that any alleged defection from it should be visited so severely. If policemen were as black as they have of late been painted, we should hardly make so much of each particular instance of alleged misconduct. The work of a police-constable makes very heavy demands on two qualities at least,—his power of keeping his temper, and his power of refusing a bribe. As regards the first, every Londoner has abundant opportunities for making proof of it. With scarcely an exception, the spectator of a street-row goes away in positive wonder at the patience shown by the police who have been called in to suppress it. As a rule, they endure abuse with great good-humour, and bear little malice even for physical injuries. When it is remembered how easily the average man loses his self-control when he is attacked either by word or deed, the almost uniform self-control of the police under what is often very great pro- vocation is a remarkable testimony to the goodness of their official training. As a force they are constantly assaulted with savage violence, and this not by strangers whom they may never meet again, but by men who are perfectly well known to them. Yet the records of the police-courts show but few examples of roughs who have been seriously injured by the constables they attack, and none at all of roughs who have been injured in cold blood and out of vengeance for former assaults. In both these respects, we believe that the Metro- politan Police will compare favourably with any similar body is the world.
No doubt, as has been cynically said, the place where the police are most to be feared is the witness-box. We question, however, whether even here the complaints made of them are not exag- gerated. There is not, we fancy, much false-swearing ; but there is probably a considerable amount of hard-swearing. The witness hardly ever testifies to anything that he knows to be untrue ; but he is precise where he ought to be vague, and confident where he is only justified in feeling a strong suspicion. This is especially the case where he is backing up another policeman. If he were strictly accurate, he would say that, as his own observation told him that his brother-constable's story was true in part, he felt no doubt that it was true altogether. Bat as the latter statement would not be evidence, he is no doubt tempted to assign to his own observation a more extensive field than it really covers. He is confident that what he has seen and what he has inferred make up a true story, and he speaks as though it had all passed under his own eyes. But as this special defect of police evidence is well known, it can to a considerable extent be guarded against. It suggests a line of cross-examination to Magistrate or counsel, and supplies a constant element of qualification to police statements. A more serious evil, perhaps, is the bribery to which one section of the force is undoubtedly exposed. Even here, however, we believe that the mischief, though real, is exaggerated. It is sometimes assumed that it is the innocent who suffer by this system, that those who will not pay the black-mail demanded by the police are unjustly accused ; whereas what really happens is that those who offer a bribe to the police sometimes escape being justly accused. That is an evil, no doubt, because by reason of it a certain proportion of guilty persons Escape punishment. But we fail to see how it would be remedied by treating police accusations as of no account at all. What we have, if possible, to put down, is a system under which impunity is extended to a oertain per-eentage of evil-doers, and the way in which it is proposed to put it down is so to discredit police action as to make this impunity general. That is, to our minds, the reverse of an improvement. If the choice lies between ten guilty persons escaping soot-free because police evidence is distrusted, and seven guilty persona being punished while three escape by buying off the police, we prefer the latter alternative. Impunity to a whole vicious class is worse than impunity to a minority of it. The true way to deal with the difficulty is to exercise strict supervision over the police employed on duty which exposes them to this special temptation, and to punish with signal and exemplary severity any constable who is discovered to have yielded to it. To deal with it in the other way, is really to make the community suffer for the sins of the police,—a form of vicarious suffering which seems to us to have no recommendations.
The suspicions which it is for the moment the fashion to cherish against the Metropolitan Police, are unwise as well as unjust. That life and property are fairly safe in London, is due entirely to the police ; that if they were withdrawn, neither would be safe for an instant,—that much every one sees. But what every one does not see, or does not see with equal dear- ness, is that in proportion as a police force becomes supine or timid, the same result is reached. A force that is afraid to act, or that acts without vigour or decision, is a more or less paralysed force ; and for the particular end for which the police are ultimately useful, a paralysed force may be treated as a non- existent force. What the police are ultimately wanted for, is not the suppression or punishment of crime, but its preven- tion ; and prevention is precisely the service that a paralysed force is disqualified from rendering. It may be galvanised into occasional activity ; but what prevents crime is constant activity. If it were known that Bond Street could be looted with safety three times out of every four, no severity of sup- pression on the fourth occasion would have any effect. The criminal population would incur that amount of risk with a light heart. It ie essential, therefore, to the maintenance of order in London that the police should act with boldness and promptitude ; and how are they to display either quality if they know they will neither be believed nor sup- ported I We have only the police to trust to, and at times we seem to go out of our way to make them untrustworthy. Our attitude to them would be rational if we belonged to the criminal class ; but in those who need to be protected against the criminal class, it is positively insane. Of course, if our advisers in this matter had an alternative system of defence to suggest, it might be worth our while to try it. But they have nothing of the sort. London is still to be guarded by the Metropolitan Police ; the only change will be that they will be made worthless for the purposes of guardianship. The watch-dog is to be left at his post, only he is to be drugged so that he may neither bark nor bite. What we should remember is that, be the Metropolitan Police efficient or inefficient, it is all we have to look to for the prevention of crime and the main- tenance of order. Possibly some of the more enthusiastic censors of the police are prepared, if necessary, to be sworn in as special constables, and to take on themselves the functions which are now performed by, the regular force. But we doubt whether this willingness is at all general ; and we doubt still more whether those in whom it is exceptionally present would be fitted for the work that has to be done. "Our Special Constable," like " Our Special Commissioner," would be apt to become our special nuisance. What we have to face, therefore, is the plain fact that we must go on depending on the police for the services for which we have depended on them hitherto. They are the only weapons we can command, and it is we who shall be the sufferers if we are foolish enough to deprive those weapons of such efficacy as they now possess. To treat every policeman as presumably perjured, to regard every blow that a policeman strikes as presumably struck out of malice or cruelty, is as wise as it would be to go into battle with unloaded muskets because a loaded musket has been known to burst, or to lodge its contents in the body of its owner. To the modern citizen, the police stand in the place of arms ; and if he is wise, he will not be anxious to reduce them to the level of regulation bayonets. The dangers incident to an efficient police must not be met by precautions which would deprive the force of its efficiency. If we are deter- mined to go that length, we had better go a little—a very little—further, and dispense with the police altogether.
Previous page
