VANDALISM AND ITS PUNISHMENT.

Evening Star, Issue 19855, 2 May 1928, Page 10

VANDALISM AND ITS PUNISHMENT.

TO TOR EDITORSir, —Tli© report of a court case in your issue of last evening shows the certain need of amendments to deal adequately with cases of vandalism, which are increasing, fed , the clemency extended to the offenders. Things have come to a sorry state when property can bo stolen, put to improper use, and then abandoned with absolute impunity. Worse, too, is it <• heti that weak clemency is extended to offenders who are not thoughtless boys, but in years, at least, grown men—of the Robertson, M‘Beath, Grindicy type. That such specimens may bo hopelessly obtuse, in so far as any sense of moral obligation is concerned, should in no way shelter them from the punishment they earn, if only such punishment act as a warning to others of similar inclinations. Another ncpect of the case, one always finds the S"ft employer ready to reinstate such specimens, even at such a time as this, when men of irreproachable character are seeking the opportunity to secure honest work. The favour extended, the laxity of the court, and, lastly, the attempted wit of the Press in publishing such cases, must all be an incentive towards crime of a more serious nature. It is time the court woke to the fact that, apart from those yho lose by such acts of crime (be it minor or major in degree), it has a duty to the budding criminal—the duty of making the punishment heavy enough to penetrate to the loutish mind, and so impress for future contemplation.— I am, etc., lI.M. May 1.