TOO MANY PRISONERS

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21807, 12 June 1936, Page 17

TOO MANY PRISONERS

TO THE EDITOE OP THE PEESS. Sir, —Why has New Zealand So tnony prisoners, out of ail proportion VJ_the Old Country’s quota of those expensive "luxuries”? In a recent English periodical, I read that, replying to a question in the House of Commons, “Mr Lloyd stated that on February 11 there were 9004 persons in prisons in England and Wales, and 1722 in Borstal institutions. England having some 26 times our population, our equivalent should surely have been fewer than 350 in prison, and fewer than 70 in Borstal, should they not? Well, the latest figures I can so far get for New Zealand are certainly some 14 months earlier, but there would have had to be a reduction which we should surely have heard of, to bring us into line, for at the end of December, 1934, our 1935 Prisons Report says that we had in prison no less than 1043 and in Borstals no less than 193, i.e., about three times as many, compared with England, as we should have had! Further, I have been staggered to learn, from the English Prison Commissioner’s report for 1933 that England then had only 102 on “preventive detention,” which is her equivalent for our “declared an habitual criminal” — of whom we, at the present time, have already nearly 100! Why is this? Are we really so much worse behaved a country than England? No! Are we so much better, in consequence of such prison bills? No! Where then is the advantage of such a system? Recently, the Controller-Gen-eral of Prisons has startled a good many citizens by deeming it fair and fitting to publish the "dossiers” of three former prisoners, by way of discrediting them. These “dossiers” reveal many prison sentences; so does it lock as if even he is convinced that prison has done them the faintest good? I suggest that our present penal policy does not sufficiently protect the law-abiding and should therefore be changed.—Yours, etc., B. E. BAUGHAN. Akaroa, June 4, 1936. [Commenting on this letter, the Under-Secretary of the Department of Justice says: “I am grateful for the opportunity of reply to the above letter. The correspondent and the general public may be interested to learn that the prison population in New Zealand is lower than it has been for half a century. The total number now in custody is 1050, which is equivalent to 6.3 for every 10,000 of the general population. Twenty-five years ago the annual receptions represented 32 for every 10,000 of the general population, whereas last year they* had fallen to 13.7. (We are “getting better every day,” but I am afraid your correspondent in recent years has not been in as intimate touch with our reformative efforts as she was nearly a decade ago). It is also interesting to observe that the latest report of the English Prison Commissioners and presented to the British Parliament a few weeks ago shows the receptions for the year to be 56.425, or equivalent to 14.1 for every 10,000 of the general population. (The figures ere not absolutely comparable, but I think it is clear that New Zealand wins by a head!) Your correspondent in her penultimate paragraph infers that some startling dossiers even convince me that in some cases prison has not done them the faintest good. I note that the English Commissioners make an apt observation, that ‘there is always to be found a residium of irreclaimables.’ These, unfortunately, do spoil cur hatting average, but our percentage of successes is none the less gratifyinelv high, and we never give up hope.”]