HC Deb 18 July 1864 vol 176 cc1625-6

said, he desired to explain that Mr. Arnold, the Police Magistrate, thought the statement he had made the other night in answer to the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. Whalley) was calculated to throw blame upon him. He wished, therefore, to say that he had desired to cast no blame whatever upon Mr. Arnold. He had merely intended to convey that Mr. Arnold had not represented to the Secretary of State or the Commissioners of Police that the conduct of a Police Constable to whom he had made reference required investigation. Mr. Arnold said that his usual course in such cases was to make a verbal communication, but he thought that, where the conduct of a Police Constable was concerned, it was desirable that the Magistrate's opinion should be recorded in writing, together with the grounds on which it was based.


said, he wished to ask whether Police Magistrates were to be expected to make these communications to the Home Office respecting the misconduct of the Police when, as had happened he believed in three instances, they had previously done so in vain?


said, he was not aware that the fact was as stated by the hon. Gentleman. All he could say was, that if the conduct of a constable required to be brought under the notice of the Commissioners of Police, it ought to be done in writing and not by a verbal statement, which might be inaccurately reported.

Forward to