The news-democrat. (Providence, R.I.) 1906-1909, 1906-07-09
MONDAY, JULY 9, 1906.
TWO KINDS OF JUSTICE.

Citizens OF providence nave not lorSolleH
that it developed during the trial OF Chief OF
Police Matthews on the charge OF attempted
conspiracy to injure the good name and standing
OF Rev A. b Crsty, that Inspector Shea of the
Fall River police department had been pernciors-
y active in behalf OF the accused
The testimony made it clear that Inspector
Shea had endeavored through Nashs manager at
Fall River TO bring pressure, amounting in tact
to intimidation, TO bear on Nash to induce him to
refrain from testfying in support OF the charges
preferred by Rev Mr. Cristy.
Sober-mnded citizens were amazed and
shocked at this barefaced attempt OF a member OF
the police department Of city outside this COM
monwealth, who was in now way directly or in
directly concerned in the case, to defeat the ends
of Justice by most reprehensible and dangerous
means
The action OF the Fall River officer created
the suspicion that when a member OF the police
department of one city is accused OF grave
offence the services of members OF departments
in other cities be enlisted in his behalf in an
endeavor to save the man against whom charges
have been lodged from exposure and punishment.
Inspector Sheas action was regarded as par
ticularly mischievous because it betrayed dis
position on the part OF police officer to stand by
each other in time of trouble and to employ any
means however dsgraceful, to save the accused
from chastisement, without regard to the justice
or to the rights of the people who have suffered
by the misdoing.
Fortunately Sheas attempt to intimidate
Nash did not succeed, though in connection with
the effort made in the direction by the
friend of "the man who sat at the hearing it did
have the effect Of inducing Nash to flee the city
temporarily and thus place him in contempt OF
the police commission before which he had been
duly summoned to testify.
The verdict in the Matthews case was one OF
guilty. verdict that received the unanimous
approval of the entire community. The punish
ment was reprimand the inadequacy OF which
aroused in the people of Providence feeling OF
Indignation that will not be aayed until full JUS
tice has been done by the removal of Matthews
from the position of chief position his con-
viction proves him utterly unfit to hold.
There has been much speculation as to
whether the police board of Fall River would
overlook Inspector Shea's mischievous activity in
the interest OF Matthews, but it will be INDUCED
in no longer.
The board did not overlook the offence 1t
made quiet investigator the result OF which is
that Shea has been removed from the position al
headquarters he has held for more than fifteen
years and transferred to night duty at suburban
station.
Here we have punishment that is reason
ably adequate. In the Matthews case the penalty
was shamefully inadequate. The difference in the
two cases is that in the one political pressure
was mischeviously potent while in the other il
was poweress.
Shea in the quiet OF his suburban retreat may
sometimes ponder on the difference in Justice a:
administered in Fall River and in Providence
difference that heavily penalties the lesser
offender and permits the escape with the futile
punishment of a paper reprimand the greatei
offender, the chief OF police convicted OF con
spiracy to deiame and ruin the character OF ;
reputable clergyman.