THE PROBATION ACT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXX, Issue 8623, 26 October 1888, Page 3

THE PROBATION ACT.

A RECUSANT PROBATIONER. In Banco yesterday morning Mr J. 0. Martin, Crown Prosecutor, called the attention of His Honor Mr Justice Ward to a case of an unusual kind connected with, the working of the First Offenders Probation Act. In fact, he said, this was the first case of tho kind which had as yet occurred. A man named James Buckley, who had been on April 9 of this year convicted of stealing a cheque for £. B, had been placed on probation for three years, and ordered to pay .£lO towards the coats of the prosecution. Ho had received his probation license, but bad made default in reporting himself to the Probation Officer, and paying the monthly instalments of the JEIO, He had, therefore, been arrested under tho provisions of tho Act, but the difficulty was what to do with him now that he was arrested. The clause of the Act bearing on tho point was the twelfth,- which was as follows: “ Any offender placed upon probation by a Court and failing to comply with, or conducting himself in a manner inconsistent with, the conditions of his release, may be re-arrested by the Probation Officer of the district wherein the offender is residing, or at the verbal or written request of such Probation Officer, or by any other Probation Officer or constable in any part of the Colony, without further warrant, and again brought before the Court where ho was originally convicted, and such Court may, after taking the evidence of the Probation Officer, and considering the record of the facts at the trial or hearing adduced, or any other evidence, may thereupon commit the offender to prison for any period allowed by law in respect of the offence whereof ho was originally convicted, or again release him on probation on such terms as it shall think fit.” Did the clause mean that the prisoner was to be brought up at the next sittings of the Supreme Court for tho trial of criminal cases P

His Honor said that surely the Supremo Court had jurisdiction; it was scarcely necessary to wait till the criminal sittings. Mr Martin said of course the Court had universal jurisdiction. Would his Honor fix a time to deal with the matter ? Hia Honor fixed three o’clock. THE PRISONER DEALT WITH. At throe o’clock Mr Donaldson brought James Buckley before the Court. • Mr Martin called tho following witnesses : Andrew E. Bloxam, Registrar of the Supreme Court: Produced the record of the trial of James Buckley at this Court on April 9, 1888. He was indicted for stealing from the person, found guilty, and placed on probation tor three years, subject to paying £llO costs of prosecution by monthly instalments of 15s. James Donaldson, gaoler at Addington, and Probation Officer for the Christchurch district: The person in custody was the man named in the indictment produced by the Registrar. When Buckley was released witness gave him a license. Buckley had not fulfilled tho conditions of the license. He had left the district without witness’ permission, had failed to report himself to witness on Sept. 24 last, and had failed to pay hia instalments for the last five months. Buckley had been re-arrested on Oct. 23, and witness received him at the Addington Gaol on Oct. 24. To Buckley : 1 got a letter from you in August last, through Constable Johnston. You were ordered to report to mo personally on the foutth Monday in each month. I received no report on the fourth Monday in August. Buckley : I reported myself to the police at Blenheim.

Witness (to his Honor) .- I received the letter on Oct. 10. It was in pencil, and without any date. It said ho (Buckley) had been in Blenheim, and was on his way to Nelson. That was six days after he was due for report. I waited four days’ grace before I reported him to the police. Buckley (in reply to his Honor) : Had not tried to evade, but had reported himself to Constable Johnston at the Waiau, He had not thought it necessary to get his license endorsed. Had left tho district to seek employment. In the hack country was at a great distance from any police station. Mr Donaldson (to his Honor) : There was nothing against Buckley except his failing to report himself and non-payment of tho instalments. Had heard nothing against him from the police. Had given Eucklev every latitude. Buckley (to his Honor) : Had not doneeweek’s work, though he had travelled 200 miles. Had met men in half-scores looking for work and unable to get it. Had been

up the East Coast, the other side of Blenheim. Mr Donaldson : Buckley could travel all over the country if he got the properauthority. Buckley: Had lived by travelling through the stations. Hia Honor; " A Sundowner.” Mr Donaldson : Buckley had paid nothing of the -£lO. A friend had paid the first instalment of 15s. He (Mr Donaldson) had not tho least doubt that Buckley was willing to work if he could get work. Mr Martin hoped that the present proceedings would act as a caution to Buckley, who ought to have no difficulty in getting work now that the shearing season was at hand. Ho (Mr Martin) did not wish to unduly press against the man, hut wished to disabuse people of the idea that tho conditions of probation could be treated with contempt. Buckley: lam sick and sore with travelling. Farmers have plenty of employment for men, tut nothing to pay for it. His Honor: Men often spoil their chance of employment by asking exorbitant wages and refusing to work with them. Buckley : I prefer to go to gaol. Mr Martin: I can give the man employment for two or three days. Buckley : I shall be very thankful. His Honor cautioned Buckley that his sentence would have to he worked out in full if he did not comply with the conditions of tho probation. He might go now. Buckley: Thanks, your Honor. His Honor directed a new license to he issued, Buckley to begin his three years’ probation from the present date. LAW NOTICES THIS BAY. o (Before His Honor Mr Justice Ward.) IN CHAMBERS. Wright v. Public Trustee.—For order for sale of land. Mr Martin . Daly v. Rutherford and Others.—For writ of mandamus. Mr Harper. Re Robert Wilkin, deceased.—For commission to executor. Mr Harper. Trustee Act rc Frederick John Pudney, deceased. —For directions. Mr Widdoweon. Wilkin v. Deans.—Return to summons of Oct. 25. Mr Deacon.