RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18458, 23 July 1923, Page 9

RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICE.

" BAIT " FOR A BURGLAR. RIGHTS OF HOUSEHOLDERS. [fhom our own correspondent,] SYDNEY, July 1L A little time back a shopkeeper, tired of having his place robbed,'•' and disgusted with ' what »he regarded as the lethargy' of the police, took the law into his own hands. He laid a whisky, "bait" for the latest burglar ha.' was expecting. The next morning . the. glass was empty', and the bird had flown, but the shopkeeper told the police they would probably find the man in hospital. . They did. He was' lying "prostrate in bed. He went out to the "bait," and now.has two years I in which to repent, behind the gaol walls. But what if he had died? Has a householder the right thus to take the law into his own hands? Are not even burglars, like other human beings, members of society The question of the-rights 01 householders in v tins • respect has given rise to an interesting controversy. ' The general view is that a civilian is treading on dangerous ground in ' such a case, and that a householder, on discovering a burglar on his premises, is not justified in scooting or taking other such ' extreme measures unless he believes the intruder intends violence. His job, in short, is narrowed down to the feat lof capturing the burglar intact,. leaving it to the police, and the judge and jury to do the. rest. The pioneer of this new way of catching burglars stoutly defended his action in Court, on the 'ground that the police toould not catch the burglars for him. One of the afternoon papers, in discussing the question, says that, strictly speaking, a householder should, before shooting or laying "baits" find \ out if the burglar intends violence. But, as .it ,admits, burglars sometimes have hasty tempers, and might resent being questioned. It is certainly an interesting point.