Now the points that I wish all this to illustrate are these: Men at the
head-quarters of Government, out of touch with real life, read the
Track Law, think it most useful and just, and insist on its being
enforced. Officers on the spot, accustomed to accept all law as the
epitome of justice, follow the Act without thinking. The
responsibility is really on them, as Government tells them to judge
each case on its merits, but they fear that if they reported that no
case under the Track Law ever had any merits they would be written down
as "wanting in energy." As they have not been trained to think for
themselves, they do not do so. They fulfil all the requirements of the
Act, and are satisfied. Moreover, subsequently, to justify their own
action they must praise the Act. Therefore a vicious circle is
created. Government says: "District officers praise the Act, therefore
have it stringently enforced, for they know its actual value." And
district officers say: "Government declares this to be an admirable
Act, therefore I must enforce it." No one ever investigates the facts.
If a district officer have doubts, he discreetly smothers them as
babies, lest they grow.
And this is but one instance. I mention in a later chapter a still
more striking case of this sort of action; and even many examples would
not expose its whole evil. It is the spirit that renders such things
possible that is disastrous. So are officers trained to believe that
when anything untoward happens they must do something--they must punish
somebody. The idea that if they act without full knowledge the
something they do will be wrong and the persons they punish will be
innocent is not allowed to intrude. They will, of course, always act
by law, but then, "_summum jus, summa injuria_." In the old days this
could not have happened. In the first place, Government trusted its
officers, and its trust was not misplaced; now it trusts its laws; yet
there is nothing so unintelligent, nothing so fatal as rigid
laws--except those who believe in them. In the second place, officers
with the personality and knowledge of the men of former days would have
insisted on seeing for themselves and judging for themselves. They
would have cared nothing that they might be supposed not to have
"energy." They would know they had something better than that--they
had understanding.
The possibility of making our laws and our government generally
endurable to the people depends on the personality of the district
officer.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account