The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-01-29


the extent of these rasca hties. But Mr..
BucKNER has begun at the wrong end, and
he will find 1t out before he is much older.
The Police and the Mackenzie Case.
II appears that the superintendent of
Police defends the unlawful arrest in the
MACKENZIE ease. He does not pretend that
he thought his action was legal; on the
contrary, he expressly admits that 1t was
Illegal, but tries to justify it rs customary.
II 1t Is defensible on this ground, then 1t
must be customary for the police TO violate
the law.
His whole explanation only makes the
Outrage palmer. The first telegram, he
tells us, was received ut o'clock on Friday
morning. Although accustomed, a. he
further assures us, to make arrests on mere
kilograms, he did not at first deem this one
sufficiently definite. lie wanted to know
what was the charge on which Mr..
BRYDoEs, Mrs. MACKENZIE, and her two
children, were TO be taken into custody.
This would seem to involve the assump-
ton, even in his view Of proper police
action, that they ought not to be arrested
Accordingly, he telcgHphed back, ask
ing for information IA to the nature of the
charge Did he get it7 No. 1.-THE chief
of the Montreal police replied, Arrest nj
once. Detectives from this city are on their
way to New York OF words TO that eff
feet" This was the answer as stated by
Superintendent WALLfNa himself. Il was
an evident evasion of his question. IL left
him as ignorant of the charge as ever.
Why, then, did he suddenly become salts
fed on the subject, and proceed to make
the arreet7
81 then sent two officers" he says, and
had Mrs. MACKENZIE and Mr.. BRYDaEs
brought TO the Police Central Once. II
was then 80 late on Friday afternoon that
there was no magistrate sitting in any
court before whom the prisoners could
have been taken. and | was obliged TO
keep them in custody until Saturday morn
ing. They were not made To suffer any
discomfort except their detention" II Ia
discreetin the Superintendent to speak OF
the forcible arrest and removal OF these
strangers from their hotel rs having them
" brought 10 headquarters. But no one
familiar with the methods of legal pro-
cedure in this city can doubt that their
case could have been presented to maEis-
trate that evening, IL the Superintendent
had so desired. At his request, no police
justice would have refused TO hear II. In
that event, however he knew that they
would be Instantly discharged, and so, as
he says, they were not made to suffer any
discomfort except In their detention"
Such n thing as mental discomfort Ia evil
Tie seems to think that If people have
enough to eat and drink, and are kept
warm, they rather like TO be deprived Of
their personal liberty, and that too. not
only without due process Of law, but with
out any process of law whatever.
His most shameless utterance, however,
was the statement that " Mrs MACKEN-
zIE's flight with property belonging to her
husband could easily have been made
grand larceny, but out of consideration
for her feelings the matter was dropped"
We have no doub that even Mr.. MAcKEN-
zIE, however wronged he may feel him
self to be by his wife's conduct, would
blush with indignation at the mere sug-
gestion that he should adopt SO unworthy
and dishonorable subterfuge. But when
such u suggestion comes from the chief
officer OF our police, il may well be asked
how many acts have been made" grand
larceny or other crimes, in this city, i'll
order covertly to further private or I'M
lawful purposes?