JUVENILE DELINQUENCY

Putaruru Press, Volume XXI, Issue 1236, 26 June 1947, Page 4

JUVENILE DELINQUENCY

ADDRESS BY MAGISTRATE An extremely interesting address am juvenile delinquency was delivered by Mr. S. L. Paterson, S.M., to a large gathering off memfoa-s at the June meeting off the Home and School Association held in Putaruru last week. Mr. T. L. Pearca, president, welcomed the guest speaker, and introduced him to the meeting. Mr. Paterson commenced his address by remarking that he felt flattered, by the large attendance. However, he was not vain enough to think that all present had come to hear him. Rather he thought they we-e there because of their interest in the young generation, on whose shoulders rests the future off our country. He was gratified to see .this interest, because in the past too much emphasis had been made on the older generation. Because posterity had no vote, the tendency had been to place an intolerable burden on the generations of the future. The subject off juvenile delinquency was a very wide one, stated Mr. Paterson. It was reported that there was increasing interest in the country in juvenile delinquency, and this was a matter for congratulation. It was impossible for him to attempt to deal with the whole of the subject, but he would deal with the attitude off the law towards the subject and describe the workings of the children’s court. During the last 100 years a big change had taken place in the attitude off the law towards juvenile delinquency, and the speaker proved this by describing the punishments inflicted' on children 100 years ago for small offences, and comparing them with those, iff any, made today. In those days, also, the children appeared in the criminal court with adult offenders, and were placed in gaol with them. To-day, throughout the British Empire, and the United States off America, children are dealt with in chiidren’s courts where, although certain technicalities of the criminal court are Observed, the object is not to punish, but to save. An enquiry mpde some time ago revealed; that GO per cent, of the hardened criminals were arraigned before they were' 16 years off age. The object off the different procedure in the children’s courts was thus aimed at preventing the manufacture of criminals and thereby multiplying the number of good citizens. If that 60 per cent, could be caught when young they, could possibly foe prevented from . becoming the hardened criminals who prey on the country. The court can and does, stated tlie ’speaker, inflict punishment, but only does so when all else fails, and" only as a last resort. Mr. Paterson detailed the regulations under the Child Welfare Act, 1925, which covered the working of the children’s court, and described the powers given the magistrate in regard to his dealings with the children brought before him. Mr. Paterson stated the criticism was frequently levelled at the workings of the children’s court, it being considered that the magistrates were too lenient. This he considered was due to lack off understanding of the modem youth, and also of the work off the court. The children were always dealt with in a room apart from the police court, and the public was not admitted. The press was only admitted with the consent of the magistrate, and then was not permitted to use the name of the child being dealt with. He personally always admitted the press. The reports served as a warning, and the public was advised off how the offfences which may have alarmed it occurred. All stipendiary magistrates' in New Zealand had been appointed as special magistrates for children’s courts. The English system, whereby special magistrates were appointed solely to children’s courts, was to foe preferred, as the busy magistrates in New Zealand had not the to follow up their cases. The sparse population in this country probably did not make the introduction of the English system possible. The procedure in the children’s court was very informal. The charges were read out in simple language, and the child asked if he or she did that. If a denial is made, then evidence is called. The matter is then discussed with the child and its parents. Informality is stressed, as if a child appeared: before a formal court it is apt to dramatise the affair, and give itself the leading role. The whole effect is then lost, and the child receives no benefit from the proceedings.

Always before a children’s court sits a report on the child, its history, home, behaviour, etc., is received by the magistrate from a child welfare, officer. This officer also visits. the school and Obtains a special report on the child’s life at school. Usually, with all this to hand, there is no need to go into the case in great lengths. However, the matters are not always easily dealt with— the child is naturally bewildered, conscious of guilt, and apprehensive of what is going to happen. As he had said before, punishment was not very often inflicted. The child was usually .admonished, and discharged, and the offence discussed with it. He personally admonised the child in a few plain word's, and always avoided sarcasm and pompousness—the first breeds resentment, and' the latter becomes' ridiculous.

A magistrate could also order that the child be placed under the supervision of a child welfare officer for a certain time. The child was left at home, but its activities were kept under the supervision of the welfare officer. In gome cases it was necessary to place restrictions on the juveniles’ activities. They were not permitted to stay out too late, or to attend dances, etc. A magistrate can also commit a child to the care of a welfare officer —that is, the child is taken from the home and parents This is done only when its home and surroundings are not satisfactory. In New Zealand home conditions were not as deplorable as in England, but were often deplorable enough. A further power enables the magistrate to order a child to be detained in an institute for discipline. He personally very rarely used this power, as the welfare officers generally knew best as to what the child needied. Mr. Paterson read a list off the various homes and institutes to which juvenile delinquents are sometimes sent. He also mentioned the Borstal institute, about which he siaidi there was much misapprehension. The institute had proved tc be very successful, it being reported that the number who had .to be sent back is less than 8 per cent.

Mr. Paterson also mentioned the controversial matter “corporal punishment.” He personally had no objection to corporal punishment being administered in the home by the parents, who had some affection for the child, or by the teacher, provided it was not excessive. Such punishment acts as a deferent, and is usually administered immediately after the offence has been committed. It was not so, however when it was administered by the court. Again, for the child, the latter became an event, and the child sometimes to other children became a hero. Thus the child would take the first opportunity to commit a further offence, to sfoow how brave he was."

'Speaking of the causes Of juvenile delinquency, Mr. Paterson said there was no one cause. The pictures, the radio, high wages, seditious literature, Government policy —all had been blamed. All may contribute to it, but they were not the root causes. In hi* opinion, the root cause was “fear.” In children this meant insecurity, and most of the cases of juvenile delinquency . resulted from broken homes, a bereavement, o,r lack of unity between parents. Public dances were also a m'ajoT cause off juvenile delinquency, stated the magistrate. They had a particular danger for young girls, and it was appalling to 'know of the number of young girls between 16 and 16 years of age who attended these dances. Mr. Paterson concluded his address by again expressing his pleasure at the interest shown in the younger generation. He was extended warm applause for his l address, and the evening concluded' with the serving cf a tasty supper.