Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PREFERENTIAL TRADE.

LONDON, May 18. Mr Chamberlain, in addressing a conference of the Labour branch of the Tariff Reform League, claimed that his fiscal proposals were on the same lines as trades unionism. He added that he was convinced the Aliens Bill would pass this session. May 19. The Morning Post (C) declares that there is reason to think that the Cham-beirlain-B&lfour negotiations have failed to bring a common policy much nearer, though they have to some extent cleared the air. May 20. Lord Robert Cecil, in a letter to The Times, says the late Lord Salisbury, besides repeatedly expressing to his sons his profound dissent from Mr Chamberlain's proposals so far as they were developed during his lifetime, wrote «a letter to one of them in that sense. Replying to the challenge of the Parliamentary Committee of the Trades Union Congress, the Union Branch of the Tariff Reform League asserts that Mr Chamberlain is receiving the support of numerous elected delegates from the English, Scottish, and Welsh unions. A Gazette notice brings the following birds find animals under the Animals Protection Act: — American elk, blaok-tailed deer, white-tailed deer, pintail duck, wood duck, canvas-back duck, snow geese, white-fronted gooee, American black duck, Mandarin ; duck. Canada goose, and black brant geese.

A WARTSIff« SENTENCE. {Feoh Our Own Cokbesfondbnt.) CHRISTCHURCH, May 16. Mr Justice Cooper to-day passed sentence on Thomas Lawrence, who yesterday pleaded "Guilty" to the charge of counselling another to perform an illegal operation. Lawrence is well known here, and the interest in the case was intense. In passing sentence, his Honor said that he had considered the prisoner's case very carefully. First, with reference to the application which his counsel had made to admit him to probation, in his opjnion the offence was one in respect of which it would be entirely improper for him to extend the provisions of the First Offenders Probation Act. He did not consider the case came within that act at all, because when a man was a party to such a crime he was doing an act which endangered life, and that of itself was sufficient, quite apart from any other circumstances, to take the case out of the category of offences provided for by the Probation Act. Quite apart from that, the offence of procuring a miscarriage — and that was really tbe offence the accused had been convicted of, although he had not actually performed the operation — was one of so serious nature that it would be quite contrary to his duty were he to consider the application of the acctfced's counsel. He was quite sure that the accused had hitherto borne a good character, and that must, to some extent perhaps, in a case of the present description, weigh with him in determining the measure of punishment that would be inflicted upon the accused. But the offence was one of an extremely serious nature, so serious indeed that, although the accused had not actually committed the offence, the Legislature had placed him in the same category as the person who actually committed the offence. He was afraid that there was not sufficient consideration, or sufficient thought, on the part of young men when they indulged in vicious practices and wished to get rid of the consequences of their vicious acts. He was afraid .that there was not sufficient consideration shown (1) for the girl, and (2) for the example -which such men set to the community. He was afraid $hat some people thought that the procuring of the miscarriage of a girl was a venial offence. He entirely disagreed with that, for he considered it to be a serious offence — one of the most serious a man could commit. It had been suggested that accused's degree of guilt, although in the eyes of the law it was the same as that of a man who actually committed the offence, was of a lesser nature. That was a matter of opinion. When a girl who had fallen, and was under a strong temptation to get rid of the consequences of her fall, fell into that temptation and obtained or persuaded another person to commit the offence, there might be something to be said in favour of the girl, because she wished to cover her shame and get rid of the consequences of what was as much the act of the person, who seduced her as her own act. But where a man got a girl into trouble, and declined to marry that girl, and persuaded another persott to commit an offence" upoiC that girl, he wa-s very. much afraid that tho reason why the offenoe was committed was not so much to save the girl from shame as to get the man himself out of the trouble and expense of supporting the. -child. The principal offender — that was ; -the man who actually performed the operation — hed been sentenced by the court to six years' imprisonment. It might be said^-and had been eaid by accused's counsel — that the principal's act differed from that of the accused, inasmuch as he performed the act for reward; but the principal offender would not have been in the trouble in which ha had been, and would not have been, expia-fe-ing the consequences o£ his crime, had he not been persuaded to commit that crime by the accused. It was always^ a very painful thing to any judge, and to him especially, to see a young man in the accused's position/ It was very painful to have to administer the law as one who, in his conscience, thought it ought to be administered; but he could not t>ass over that offence^ either by admitting the acousid to probation or by sentencing him to a ishort term of imprisonment. He failed to see any material difference between the accused's guilt and that of Suteliffe, the principal offender. He would take into consideration one or two matters. First, he would take into consideration the tim« during which the accused had been in gaol, and secondly, that he did not persist in his defence the previous day. Taking all tb» ciroumstanoes into consideration, and the accused's previous good character, he could not impose upon him a less sentence than four years' imprisonment with hard labour to take effect from the present time.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/OW19050524.2.96

Bibliographic details

Otago Witness, Issue 2671, 24 May 1905, Page 27

Word Count
1,051

PREFERENTIAL TRADE. Otago Witness, Issue 2671, 24 May 1905, Page 27

PREFERENTIAL TRADE. Otago Witness, Issue 2671, 24 May 1905, Page 27