INFLICTING FINES.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 238, 7 October 1936, Page 5

INFLICTING FINES.

"NOT FOR POVERTY."

SOLICITORS' OPINIONS

NEW PROPOSAL SUPPORTED.

Support is given by members of the legal profession in Auckland to the I legislation proposed by the Minister of Justice, the Hon. H. (1. R. Mason, to make better provision for the payment of fines, and to diminish the number of cases, where imprisonment was not in the first place intended by the law. but where it was automatically imposed by the inability of the offender to pay the line. "There should '.iol be imprisonment for poverty," said Mr. J. J. Sullivan, in giving his support to the proposal. Until opportunity was given to peruse the bill proposed by the Minister of Justice, it was not possible to give an opinion on the bill itself, said Mr. Sullivan. The principle, however, of (aj inquiring into the capacity of the offender to pay his fine, and ('o) to make every effort to recover the fine before imprisonment was inflicted was not only sound and just, but had been advocated by law reformers in England. "Unjust" Fines. "The basis 011 which fines are inflicted in many cases is not just," said Mr. Sullivan. "To state a case: Two men are before the Court for precisely the same offence. One is a wealthy man, and the other penniless. The fines, in many instances, are the same. This means no punishment whatever to the wealthy man, and it invariably means imprisonment for the poor man, whe.i imprisonment was never intended by law. Some magistrates have taken into consideration the position of the accused regarding their property or their means, but not all magistrates. The result in cases where the means or property of the accused has not been taken into consideration means that the penniless man is imprisoned. "The law should make it clear that the economic position of the accused before the Court—in cases where the punishment is a fine —should and must be taken into consideration. Regularly, when a fine is inflicted on an accused earning wages, or who has not the ready money to pay the fine, an appeal is made to the magistrate for time to pay. That request is sometimes granted, and, in many instances, the humiliation of the accused in explaining why time is required is more hurtful than the fine itself. In many instances, and I am speaking from long experience, time has not been granted, and it has been impossible to find grounds on which time to pay has been refused, when considering the cases where time to pay has been granted.

"The bill, therefore, is a proper one in giving time to pay in virtually all cases," continued Mi". Sullivan. "The principle of tlie bill has a just basis, ancl will remove the worst feature of the administration of our criminal law in the people's court, so that in cases where fines are intended and not imprisonment, there should not be imprisonment for poverty." "Well Worth Trying." Support for the proposed measure wan given also by Jlr. Allan bloody. As a principle he did not believe in imprisonment except as a last resource, and the Minister's proposal was worth trying. In his experience he had found that when once a man had been imprisoned, I for however small an offence, there was I a risk that a stigma was placed upon him that was very difficult to live down. To imprison, therefore, without a full inquiry into the capacity of an accused, person to pay a fine had very far-reach-ing effects. "So long as there is no suggestion of political interference (which in my experience I have known to occur) with the sentence or fines inflicted," said Mr. Moody; "and when it is assured that a person, who can pay, cannot avoid payment by political pull, the measure should have the approval of all rightthinking practitioners, particularly those who have any extensive experience of the courts. Imprisonment as a punishment, except in cases of hardened offenders, should be very sparingly used."