Back to Justice

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 532, 8 December 1928, Page 8

Back to Justice

Who Should Pay Extradition Cost ?

ENDEAVOURS are being made to trace the whereabouts of an Auckland solicitor who has left the Dominion without accounting for over £7,000 in trust monies. If he is found, the cost of his return must be borne hv the creditors. Some business men and lawyers in Auckland believe that at least part of extradition costs in cases of this sort should be paid by the State. Incidentally the general question has been raised of protecting, the public against defaulting solicitors, of whom Auckland has seen several in recent years.

the police will undertake to extradite a "wanted” man for a crime of this kind, they must have •3, guarantee from the creditors that the expenses will be paid—the fact that the offence is punishable by gaol notwithstanding. In some instances the creditors have nothing, and moreover are likely to get nothing from the meagre estate of the offender if he were brought to justice, and the result is that the law remains unsatisfied, and the ends of justice go unserved. } If a business man departs, taking m m as as & as m as as as &

with him a sum of trust money, and later he is adjudged a bankrupt, the first call from the estate is the expense of bringing him back for trial. It sometimes happens, however, that there is nothing left in the estate, and the only satisfaction which the creditors would derive in bringing the offender to book would be to see him punished for his betrayal of their trust. This doubtful pleasure is sometimes waived in the face of heavy expense. Many business men, and some lawyers, believe that the cost of extradition should be borne by the State, for the season that if a crime be committed against society or against the State, then society or the State should pay for its expiation. The taxation which the people pay for the efficient maintenance of the police force is considered to be sufficient inducement

i for the law to undertake the capture at the public expense ot this class of criminal. The viewpoint of the law is entirely different. If a crime be committed against the person, such as murder, robbery, or a serious assault, the long arm stretches to the uttermost ends of the earth if necessary, and is not withdrawn until the offender is caught and returned to face his peers on the jury bench. If, on the other hand, a crime be committed against property which affects only the pockets of a number of people, such as embezzlement or fraud, the police will not bear the expense of extradition. Where private gain is involved the money of the people is considered to be illspent. on such a project. Ltl- r WtLL ALONE This principle is sometimes carried to such an extent that in minor crimes the criminal is left alone If he is better out of the country, as the cost of bringing him back would not be justified by his punishment. Here, again, there is a danger of encouraging further similar offences. An Auckland solicitor says the responsibility for extradition cost is one purely for the individual circumstance. It is expected that the State’s money should be spent to the advantage of the State, and such shouljj be the policy of the authorities. A case cannot be divorced from its facts, he says, and the two sides operate with equal emphasis. It Is not long since an Auckland solicitor was sent to gaol for trust defalcations parallel to those of the man for whose arrest a warrant has now been issued. The profession is perturbed, and seeks a solution for the problem of misapplied funds, and protection for a trusting public. SUGGESTED SOLUTION A scheme which possesses wide possibilities has been born in the xhind of an Auckland solicitor. He proposes that instead of the fund which the New Zealand Law Society has suggested as a guarantee against defalcations, a guarantee corporation should be formed among the leading men in the profession In each district, with power to instructor their own auditor to inspect the books of anyone they have reason to suspect. Admission to the corporation would be obtained only by men of proven worth, and those who could not show on their notepaper that they had the sanction of the corporation would, as a matter of course, go to tho wall. The Law Society at present, solicitors say, cannot choose the entrants to the Bar, nor are they able to supervise the audit of any member’s books. The formation of this corporation, though essentially a concern for precise conduct and unquestioned administration, would, it is suggested, restore the confidence of ; doubtful investors.