PRISON SYSTEM IN NEW ZEALAND.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLII, Issue 10107, 15 October 1917, Page 6

PRISON SYSTEM IN NEW ZEALAND.

Mr James fiiorn addressed fa large audience in tin*. Rosy Theatre la.it evening on Dur Prison .System,” basing his remarks on the experience he had undergone during his m-em incarceration at Mount Eden (laol. Mr Thorn contended that the present system of the treatment of prisoners tended to_ demoralise rather than to improve. The authorities should deal with ihe causes that produced crime, and not to catch the criminal and punish him, ami make him into a more hardened law-break-er through the embittering experiences birred upon him. No system of justice should be allowed to iufliet injustice, and the public should lake the matter up and see that there was a general overhaul of the prison system. Cntil a man was found guilty, he was supposed to be innocent, yei the. men awaiting trial had to mix with condemned criminals, and received the same treatment, only they did not get as much food as the matt serving a hard-lahour sentence. They got 2Toz dry bread, one gill milk. 2 pints black tea, and 6oz or 7«z. of meat af midd.'iy. Tlm-v -pent SO hours a day in a 9ft by 10(1 cell — dining (lie other four hours they were allowed out for exercise—and they slept, in hummocks, no mat trass, with four blankets, some of which were so old they dated back to 1870. They were not allowed lo whistle, sing, or play games. lie had seen a man cheeked for just humming a tune. If his friends supplied it. he was allowed one smoke a day, the authorities supplying one match. And these are so-called innocent, men —men awaiting trial. Indeed, many are quite innocent, being eventually acquitted,- The war news page of a newspaper uni allowed once a week lo the condemned men, but tin- men on remand were not, even allowed this, until lie made -trong representations, and the concession was now accorded (hem also. Mr 'lhorn contended that classification of prisoners;as practised in tin- gaols, was a farce, men undergoing reformative ireatnn-in being allowed to mix and work with habitual criminals, a class which, according to regulations. should be kej.it apart. There w;b -Iso die question of compensation for the man who was wrongfully arrested and detained and afterwards proved innocent. J[e should lie compensated at the rate ol £1 for every day lie was so detained. Hard labour men received Ad a day, and men undergoing relormative treatment 5s a dny, but 2s 6d a day of this was deducted for board and lodging in gaol—l7s 6d a week- and the Government s own ligures show that it only costs s:s 5d a week for each prisoner. The speaker also spoke of the treatment which, he alleged, had been meted out to a number of returned soldiers, who had been detained for al-li-ued trivial offence.-*. One soldier, who had lost tin- sight of one eye through shell shock, because he refused work at breaking stones amidst living splinters, for fear of damag'lig hi> other eye. was alleged to have been sentenced to seven days solitary confinement, yet his whole sentence was only seven days for breaking bis prohibition order. One man. who was wanted four years ago for maintenance, after.returning from the from, was promptly arrested. His wound necessitated an operation, for which he was ill hospital, yet two days after he was seiio-tu-ed, tin- speak er alleged, he was turned out of hospital and run into a cell in the basement and compelled to sleep on the floor. The speaker said if the man was not removed, to a hospital, he would make a pretty big fuii about it when he got out. Next, day tin, man was removed. In another in-1 staiu-e, a i-onsiimplive, an old man who was awaiting trial for six weeks, was al-| I, | 1() have been kept there, tue.l when