DEATH PENALTY ABOLISHED

Press, Volume C, Issue 29643, 13 October 1961, Page 12

DEATH PENALTY ABOLISHED

10 Government Members Vote With Opposition

(New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, October 12. The House of Representatives, by 41 votes to 30, tonight voted to abolish the death penalty for murder. In one of the most dramatic divisions Parliament has seen in recent years, the Attorney-General, Mr Hanan, led nine Government members across the floor of the House to vote with the Opposition.

They supported an amendment, moved in the committee stage by Mr E. P. Aderman (Government, New Plymouth), to remove the death penalty for “aggravated” murder from the Crimes Bill and replace it with life imprisonment. When the bill is passed, life imprisonment will be the penalty for all murders. The death penalty will be retained only for treason.

Government members who voted with Mr Hanan were Mr Aderman, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary to the Minister of Industries and Commerce (Mr Taiboys), Mr R. D. Muldoon (Tamaki), Mr H. J. Walker (St. Albans), Mr D. Maclntyre (Hastings), Mr G. G. Grieve (Awarua), Mr H. E. L. Pickering (Hurunui), Mr L. F. Sloane (Hobson), and Mrs E. E. Tombleson (Gisborne). The Speaker (Mr Algie) and the Chairman of Committees (Mr Jack) did not vote. Three Government and three Opposition members are overseas and the Minister of Transport (Mr McAlpine) was in Christchurch tonight.

The first Labour Govern-i meat commuted death sentences to life imprisonment and finally abolished the death penalty in 1941. The National Government reintroduced it in 1950. The second Labour Government in 1959 introduced the Crimes Bill omitting the death penalty for murder, but the bill was not passed before the Government was defeated last year. The Government commuted death sentences to life imprisonment. Only one murderer has been sentenced to death under the present National Government and his sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. One person, a woman, is at present in gaol awaiting trial on a murder charge. Mr Hanan, though he introduced the Crimes Bill, which imposed the death ; penalty for “aggravated” ' murder as Government policy, has personally waged a ! long fight against hanging. He strongly opposed the previous National Government’s decision to re-intro-duce the death penalty in 1950 and voted with the Labour Opposition against it. Tense House There was a tense atmosphere in the House during the debate on the controversial clause. The committee stage debate on the bill started just before 3 p.m. today. A ripple ran along the Opposition benches as, one after the other, Government back-benchers rose to declare their opposition to the death penalty. Several Government members who voted against the death penalty did not speak in the second reading debate last week and there was no

indication how they would vote. Eight Government members had declared they would vote against the death penalty by the time the tea adjournment was taken at 5.30 p.m. By then, it had become clear the death penalty would be abolished and soon after the House resued at 7.30 p.m. Mr Sloane announced he would vote for abolition. Mr Maclntyre said he believed the death penalty should be retained for treason, but he was opposed to it for murder. Mr H. G. R. Mason (Opposition, Waitakere), the former Labour Attorney-General, agreed that the death penalty should be retained for treason. “In some circumstances, and in war, the threat of any other penalty but death would be illusory.” Revenge Instinct Mr Muldoon said; “During the last few months every member on this side of the House has had to search his conscience on the question of the death penalty. New members have not come face to face with this question before. “Some of us, and I am one. have always had serious doubts about capital punishment for murder, and I cannot conscientiously support the clause in the bill which imposes the death penalty for murder. “I am convinced the main, if not the only, reason for capital punishment is a natural instinct of outrage, anger and the desire for revenge.” “I can’t find any evidence that hanging acts as a deterrent,” Mr Muldoon said. “I am deeply concerned at the prospect of a change in the law on the death pen-

alty with every change of Government. That’s wrong.” Mr Muldoon said he believed the majority of people in New Zealand were not ready to accept the abolition of the death penally. “But I believe Parliament should give a lead to public opinion, rather than follow it. I am convinced hanging solves nothing. I believe it no longer has a place in a civilised community.” “I doubt very much if there is much cruelty inflicted in carrying out the death penalty,” said the Minister of Internal Affairs (Mr Gotz). “It is not as if they were being hung, drawn and quartered or put on the rack.” Hanging met the demand of an outraged public, said Mr Gotz. “In peacetime my conscience cannot allow me to take life, and I can’t be a party to someone else taking that life for me,” said Mr Walker. “I stress the need for adequate punishment, and I would not hesitate to have a criminal sentenced to gaol for the term of his natural life, but I believe hanging is wrong. The Minister of Works (Mr Goosman) said the present system was best. A man was tried by a jury which could recommend mercy and the final decision still lay with the Executive Council. “Most murderers think they will never be found out,” he said. “If one person deliberately takes the life of another then his own life is forfeit.” There had been “onesided” emotion in the debate, said Mr Goosman. Scaffold scenes had been “trotted out endlessly.” “Difficult Decision” Mr Taiboys said he would vote against the retention of the death penalty. He doubted, he said, if there would ever be another decision he would have more trouble in making. “Evm though I have decided to vote against it. I am not happy, I can’t be certain,” he added. The worst crimes were usually committed by a twisted mind “and we won’t destroy him.” But society would destroy a murderer who was considered sound in mind—"the one human being we can hope to reform, because he has a mir ’. we can hope to grapple with.” Mr Taiboys said he had considered his own reaction if one of his own children was murdered and he had been drawn into emotional arguments on this. He felt a victim’s family did not feel their burden eased by the taking of the murderer’s life. The Minister for the Welfare of Women and Children (Mr Shelton) said he was very much aware that the women of New-Zealand were not of one mind on capital punishment. Relating the issue to his own portfolio, he said he supported the death penalty. Miss M. B. Howard (Opposition, Sydenham) said Mr Shelton and the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Marshall) had claimed to speak for a majority of women in supporting the death penalty but the co-ordinating body of women’s organisations, the National Council of Women, spoke in the name of hundreds of thousands of women and had castigated Mr Marshall for his attitude. Referendum Mr W. J. Scott (Government, Rodney) said that if there were a referendum, capital punishment would be retained by a handsome majority. A referendum of the women of New Zealand would show a large majority in favour of retention. Miss Howard: How can you prove it? Mr Scott: That is my own personal view. Mr Pickering said: “If there was any conclusive evidence that capital punishment was a deterrent to murder, I would vote for the bill.” Mr Sloane said: “My views are strongly in favour of the death penalty being abolished. I don’t think my views are sloppy and sentimental. I distrust the man in whom the desire for revenge and to punish is powerful.” The Minister of Housing (Mr Rae) said he wanted to see the death penalty retained for the worst type of murders. “I haven’t heard anything more inspiring than I have heard to this House today,” said the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Nash). “I have heard men who belong to a party which traditionally supported capital punishment, get up and say quietly and simply whether they believe

or don’t believe in it, and their reasons why. “I wish we could have more discussions like this,” he said. Mr G. A. Walsh (Government, Tauranga) said he regretted that because someone might prefer capital punishment this action was called un-Christian. The Minister of Defence (Mr Eyre) said that if someone close to him was murdered, and the law did not inflict the death penalty, “I would do it myself with the first gun I could get hold of.” Mr Hanan said that there had been some discussion about the meaning of the term imprisonment for life. “Life in the statute means life,” he said. “That is until the prisoner dies.” In a case of manslaughter a judge had a discretion, but for murder he had no discretion, and the prisoner was intended to remain in prison until he died.