PRISON TERM.

Auckland Star, Volume LXXI, Issue 43, 20 February 1940, Page 8

PRISON TERM.

FOR BOOKMAKERS. - I RESPECT FOR LAW. "NOT CASE FOR FINE" COMMENT BT rM »K*' JUSTICE. "If it had not been for your conduct in the box I might have persuaded myself to deal with your case, in your circumstances, not with a fine, but with some form of recognisance which would have avoided sending you to gaol, but by your conduct you precluded such possibility,'' stated Chief Justice Sir Michael Myers, in sentencing Ernest Frederick McNeil (2G) and Frederick Angus McNeil (24) to imprisonment on a charge of bookmaking on Ellerslie racecourse, on which they had been found guilty by a jury. Mr. J. J. Sullivan, appearing for the prisoners, said the jury's verdict wa« a | tribute to the administration of justice, but he desired to make a strong plea 'on behalf of the young wives of the prisoners that the punishment should take the form of a fine and not imprisonment. The week spent by the prisoners in gaol *had been a fearful experience for them and they would not be likely to offend again with a prospect of imprisonment • before them. Counsel drew attention to the Probation Officer's report that the McNeils worked regularly and did not make a wholetime business of bookmaking. Evidence in Box His Honor said the two men had made his task more than ordinarily difficult by their evidence in the box. He had on various occasions stated his view that in these cases a fine was inappropriate and contrary to principle, in that a fine was looked on more or less as a license for a continuance of an illegal business. It was the essence of democracy that the will of the majority must prevail, and equally that an existing law must be respected and obeyed, not flouted and disregarded. While he felt that no rigid rule should be laid down in such matters, he might hare persuaded himself to a course avoiding imprisonment, proceeded his Honor, but «*ie prisoners' conduct had precluded that possibility. Despita a warning to one of them, both had persisted in endeavouring to secure acquittal by a tissue of falsehoods. Not only did they «ivo false evidence of their transactions vitli a police witness, but their evidence. left the implication that the latter lia<f committed wilful and perjury. Fortunately a jury of honest men had refused to allow themselves to be deluded. It could not be overlooked, however, as perjury was calculated to undermine the very foundations of justice. In the circumstances a sentence of imprisonment must be imposed as a deterrent to the prisoners themselves and to others similarly minded to carry on an illegal business and escape punishment by perjury. Apart From Other Prisoners. The sentence of the Court, concluded his Honor, was that each of the two prisoners be sentenced to imprisonment for three calendar months. His Honor subsequently rcquoeted Mr. V. R. Meredith, Crown Prosecutor, to convey to the prison authorities his request that during their term of confinement the McNeils be kept apart from the other prisoners.