PUNISHMENT OF CRIME

New Zealand Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 10896, 10 May 1921, Page 5

PUNISHMENT OF CRIME

PROBATION ACT REVIEWED. JUSTICE BOOKING'S VIEWS. In the Supreme Court, yesterday morning, when charging the Grand Jury at the opening of the criminal sessions, Hie Honour Mr Justice Hooking reviewed the several amendments made to the First Offenders Probation Act since it was first applied in 1886. The object of punishment in criminal law, His Honour said, was threefold, to deprive the culprit of the opportunity of repeating his offence for a given time,- to instil into him and other* a fear of breaking the law, and to promote a desire not to offend against the law again. It. was along the hue of trying to promote a desire to live a lawful life that changes in the law had been most frequently made. The provision for ordinary persons to come up for sentence when called up was a device to meet cases in which the law respecting first offenders was inapplicable. A complete measure of release was provided for last session of Parliament. The amendments provided that any person might be admitted to probation, notwithstanding previous offences, but a discretion was, of course, left* with the court. Probation might be granted in respect of all offences short of murder and other offences for which the punishment was death. The term of probation was originally three years, but that term bad now been extended to five years, and if the term imposed by the court, or the conditions, were too severe, _ application mfght be made to the Prisons Board to have such term reduced or the conditions modified. “The First Offenders Act has proved an eminent success, and it is to be hoped that under the law as it now stands farther success will he achieved.’* ....

Another material alteration made had regard to persons under sentence of imprisonment and their release by direction of the Prisons Board. Previously only such persons as bad been sentenced as habitual criminals to indeterminate sentences, or those who had been committed for reformative detention might be so released, hut as the law had been amended the Prisons Board had power to release prisoners sentenced by the oonrt to definite terms of imprisonment before the expiration of each terms. A prisoner, without going to tfie Prisons Board, might appeal against his sentence to the court; he had several courts open to Urn if he considered that an injustice had been done him. Such amendments and alterations showed the trend of public opinion in the matter of punishment of crime. It was always in the power of the Crown to pardon a poison convicted of a crimo and sentenced to a term of imprisonment, and thus, with so many safeguards, one would not apprehend that prisoners would have cause for complaint as to harsh sentences, or that, If such sentences were passed, that there were not opportunities for their being reviewed.