The N.Z. Times MONDAY, AUGUST 21, 1908. PRISON REFORM

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 6606, 24 August 1908, Page 4

The N.Z. Times

MONDAY, AUGUST 21, 1908. PRISON REFORM

Vita WHICH It jBOOB»OftAT9i> TBS “ W£tUZ&73S| lOTBPBXSXS7." HMABIUHBD mi.

The futile discussion on prison reform in the House of Representatives on Friday was appropriately rounded-off by a few wooden remarks from the Minister for Justice. To Mr Wil-' ford's suggestion that a system of. classification was desirable in gaols the' Minister retorted that “reform was one thing and classification another,” and a little later he expressed the astonish- j ing opinion that “ the scientific treat-j mont of criminals was a vague term and seemed to suggest the scientific! production of men." There would be humour in this were 'the subject not! so serious and the utterances so tan-j talizingly wide of the 'mark. The. Minister’s lino of thought, as disclosed by the second of these quotations, forms an interesting subject for speculation. As for Mr Wilford’s idea, it is wholly meritorious, and need not ■ dismay officialdom, for it is by no means new, having been discussed and written about exhaustively for a quarter of a century. Without some form of classification the gaoling for fixed periods of men who are not hardened offenders is farcical, for the only result is to make them less desirable individuals then they were before incarceration. In punishing men in this way—by further degrading them—■ society punishes itself. The gaols should bo something different to places, as they are now, where men are merely hardened in their criminality, where knaves become brigands and petty larcenists learn to become burglars. It is a misnomer to speak of a “system” in the New Zealand prisons. There is no system at all, unless it be the mere . herding of a given number of human beings together under the rifle of an armed warder.

When Mr Wilford spoke of classification we apprehend he meant that there should be some recognition of grades in villainy, some effort to reduce the evil consequences of moral contamination, some attempt to alter the character of a gaol from a stew to a place of possible reformation. This should not present insuperable difficulties. It is not doing so in England, France, and America. It does aot involve any " maudlin sympathy ” vith law-breakers. It merely implies a recognition by the community that tie deliberate manufacture of criminals is bad business. The contention that the wrongdoer must bo made to suffer evil because he has inflicted evil is all very well, and the seemingly simple problem of punishment is solved in a remarkable variety of ways by many authorities. But society suffers, by the evil-doing every time a crime is committed, and if the potential criminal can be restrained from embarking on a career of lawlessness so much the better for everybody. Carlyle’s picture of the carefullywarded wicked in the model gaol in contrast with the struggling widow in the littjo shop outside “ painfully making a living by Belling red herrings ” and paying rates for the said gaol, and Mr Hogg’s lamentation the other night in the House that “ the lot of the prisoners was bettor than that of many labourers outside ” are on parallel lines and have no point. The thing to consider is whether it is reassuring for the *• struggling widow ” or “ labourer outside ” to know that men are daily turned loose on the community who will certainly rob her of her herrings and him of the fruits of his toil. Instead of helping the wicked to become worse, why not try to make them better? A gaol should not be a comfortable place, but it should not bo a hotbed of rascality, whore crimes are batched and plots concocted. XTnfortunately, they will remain so wnile the controlling head of our prisons re~

turns to common-sense suggestions such remarks as “ reform is ono thing and classification another” and the: other pearls of wisdom quoted in the' first paragraph of this article. The] rilhng hypothesis should be that crime is a disease, that a sentence of imprisonment is not equivalent to revenge, tut is imposed for the protection of society, and that society should do its best to chock the growth of the criminal instinct wherever it shows signs of development. A gaol should bo as much a reformatory as a place of punishment. This hypothesis, we may point out to Mr McGowan, has been recognised by Parliament, and should eventually form the pivot of our criminal system. aho “indeterminate sentence” was made an integral part of the law by the passage of the Habitual Criminals Act of 1906, and represents tho beginning of tho end of “ tho methods of barbarism ” in the treatment of crime. The passage of tho measure (s only reconcilable with a combination of ideals of social protection and of reformation. On no other grounds can it he justified. The Act indicates acceptance of the belief that in tho case of the "ropeater” the ordinary gaol treatment is a flagrant futility, and provides that men with certain records shall not be set free until they may bo released without risk. Such men pass [to a reformatory prison, which undoubtedly constitutes the cheapest and most humane form of social protection. Consequently, as wo are instituting reformatory methods at the extreme and unpromising end of the criminal scale it looks very like a wanton disregard of possibilities to refuse to do j so with offenders who may be assumed to be in a more plastic stage. The unroformed man, after ho has outraged society a sufficient number of times, is now to be kept in perpetual detention. But during the mechanically-allotted terms of durance he serves before reaching the “habitual” stage he is made the victim of what some hardy noologists call “penology.” Whatever admiration Mr McGowan may have for this, it is certain that something more is wanted. Society of late years lias leaned to humanity and mercy as against cruelty. It is ready now to have recourse to something approaching a dispassionate handling of its criminal and to abandon a plan of criminal treatment based on pro-scien-tific ideas and untenable moral theories. Tbo time has oom© for wider application of the indeterminate sentence and refusal to any longer allow the criminal to bo a scourge to himself and others. But before this great advance can be made the prison system requires overhauling from top to. bottom. Mr Wilford should not be discouraged by tho Minister’s irresponsive attitude, and Mr Laurenson, who made some suggestive remarks during the discussion, will, we hope, return again to the subject, for it is one of very great importance to society, with whom the criminal classes are at continual war.