PENAL REFORM.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19946, 13 November 1926, Page 22

PENAL REFORM.

HOWARD LEAGUE’S AIMS

LECTURE BY MISS B. E. BAUGHAN. Some 200 people assembled in Burns Kail on Ttiuroday night to hear an address by Miss B. L. Biiugnan, of Cunstcnurch, on “Ihe Layman’s Duty Toward the Leanquent.” The address was delivered under the auspices of the Dunedin branch of the Howard League lor Renal Ketorrn. Sister Aora occupied the chair, and suitably introduced the lecturer. Miss Baugnan said she Alt she ought to compliment Dunedin people on turning out on such a wet night. A magistrate who who had recently retired had said taat fewer ooys were sent to Lurnham tiom Dunedin than from any other pare of tae Dominion, u'illi regard to the tuoercaiav patient, we did not kill aim, but wo did everything wc could to assist him. W e had led me world in miaut uelfaie, and there was no reason why we should not lead in penal reform. As it was, tin* Ulu Country was heating us hollow. Luglaiu, since tno war uad closed some 20 prison; during tae last 12 years. There weie nou only o 3 prisons in England. U.ir penal system was, to a large extent futile. A groat many neoplo thought that tae league was inclined to be lenient towards prisoners. Tnis was'net so. The question to be considered was; Where Uiflfy were to start with reform? They must stait in the homo—in the cradle as a matter ot fact. They must give the subject as much attention as was given to ruoorc-iar T here should, she added be a behaviour or conduct clinic in each centre, there \\cro many people to whom a mother or ‘atnei could go if expert advice were wanted n ith regard to many matters, but tbere were no exports to whom ono could go for ad\i will, regard to the delinquents, l icrc werc such chmcs in America. They had in the Dominion childrens courts. This nas a stop in the right direction. A speakex at a recent Prisons Conference had sa d that each delinquent should be subjected to an examination by experts as to his““uu health. There was something wiong with a person who did hot behave properly Crime was very expensive, and should, it possible, be avoided. In New Zealand we had a protection system. £ extended. She was, she said, pleased to see that an improvement was now being brought about by the appointment of talltime probation officers.— (Applause.) It was pleasing to see that the department was endeavouring to bring about an improvement. The Prisons Department cost the country £BO,OOO annually, and the probation system cost £6CO. The latest figures she had were for 1924. which showed that 60 per cent, of the delinquents had been in prison before. In England she understood that the percentage was 64. ihe Prisons Department had lost an excellent man in the death of Mr L. E. Matthews, Controller-general of Prisons. Mi Mat thews contended that it was penal reform which was necessary, not prison retoim. She contended that a psychologist was needed in connection with crime, the bulk of those who came before the, courts required to be psychologically examined before being sent to prison, there were certain brains which did not develop after the person was 12 years of age. The kaffir was an example. England was endeavouring to grapple with the feeble-minded members of the community, but New Zealand was doing little or nothing. She asked: Had we no duty to our feeble-minded girls? Had v\e, she asked, i-o duty to these people at all? In England a feeble-minded person was registered; in New Zealand he was not. There was a gleam of hope, however, the Government sent round a commission to inquire, and now an official from the Mental Hospitals Department had been sent to England to sec what was being done by way of reform. The Minister of Health was to be congratulated on what he was doing. She would like to see a farm colony formed for the feeble-minded. They would be more satisfied living under these conditions. They were good workers, and she was quite satisfied that it would be a sue* CC The second class of delinquent was the “kink,” or border-liner.” This was a dangerous class, and in most cases they were exceedingly clever. It was from these that our class of swindlers was chiefly recruited. The speaker gave a number,of instances of clever, swindlers who were continually in and out of prison. It was decidedly wrong that some of these people should be at large. , The advice of a psy chologist was necessary in such cases. These people should be kept somewhere where their actions could be observed and studied. A sad feature was the number of men returned from the war who were in the criminal class. The next class was ihe “drunk.” The newspapers were facetious regarding a poor woman in Christchurch, who had 200 convictions for drunkenness. There should be some home to'deal wjth this class of person. It might be > said: What about your sex cases? “If,’ said the speaker, “they cleared up the three classes she had mentioned there would be no sexual cases.” That itself was a strong reason why our system should be altered. Delinquents could not be studied while they were in prison; they must be studied while they were out of prison. There was a lot of good material in our alleged criminal class. What was wanted was much more understandi; That was where the layman could help. We wanted people to say: Why have they gone wrong? It was much cheaper to reform a man than to keep him in prison. It was not necessary that each one should be a prison worker. What was necessary was that more people should take an interest in the inmates of prisons. She knew a man who went into prison on a charge of drunkenness, and he contended that he could now pick a lock with anyone. The principal topic of conversation in prison was crime. Prisoners when released from prison were not afraid of their Employers. They were afraid of the men they had been in prison with. The question they had to consider was: Were we doing our duty toward the delinquent? In reply to Mr R. Gilkison, Miss Baughan said there was no difference between hard labour, reformative treatment, and reformative detention. At the Borstal, she believed, there was a difference, but this institution was for offenders under the age of 23 years. She said she would like to see the terms mentioned deleted, and a man simply sent to prison. The Prisons Board seemed to deal with a reformative case before it dealt with the hard labour prisoner. That was really the only difference she could think of. In reply to another questioner, the lecturer said that as far as she knew nothing was being done to train warders. Policemen were trained to a certain extent, but prison warders were not. She thought this was much to be regretted. Miss Perry explained the objects of the Howard League. Mr J. Waddell Smith moved—“ That this meeting welcomes the very practical programme put forward by the Howard League for Penal Reform, and heartily commends the work of the society to the community.” The motipn was seconded, and carried amidst applause. On the motion of Mr C. J. L. White, president of the Howard League, a hearty vote of thanks was accorded the speaker.