PRISON SYSTEMS

Taranaki Daily News, 6 October 1934, Page 17 (Supplement)

PRISON SYSTEMS

THE OLD AND THE NEW ADDRESS BY MR. DALLARD. METHODS IN THE DOMINION. “Public opinion in regard to prison conditions is usually ill informed and exaggerated. One view is that it is a grim, repressive, soul-destroying relic of barbaric times. Another is that it is a place of comfort and ease where good food, lodging and even entertainment are provided free by a benevolent Government. Neither of these views conveys a correct impression of the position,” said Mr. B. L. Dallard, Undersecretary of Justice and ControllerGeneral of Prisons, in an address on “The Development of the Prison System” which he delivered to the annual meeting of the Wellington Justices’ Association. After referring to the gradual development of penological ideas and the enlightening influence of the Italian school of criminologists, prominent among whom were Beccaria and Lombroso, Mr. Dallard described at length the English prison system, upon which New Zealand methods were largely based. DOMINION’S PRISON HISTORY. “Dealing with the prison system in the Dominion prior to 1880—in which year control was centralised under Captain Hume, who was brought out from England to reorganise the prison system of the Colony—the records are very meagre,” said Mr. Dallard. “The earliest record I have been able to trace of a prison is in 1838, in the historic village of Korororeka (now Russell) in the Bay of Islands, which then had a white population of approximately 1000. Difficulties arose there regarding the administration of justice, owing to the limitation of the jurisdiction of the Governor of New South Wales. Some form of social control was found to be necessary. The lawlessness of some of the beachcombers was such as to infuriate the Natives, and likely to lead to friction, and an association of citizens was formed which administered justice in a rough and ready, but quite effective fashion. . . “As the Colony developed local gaols were established, but persons found guilty of more serious offences were transported to Tasmania. Some criminals were detained in military barracks, and others in hulks. The last prison hulk at the Otago Heads was not abolished until less than half a century ago.

“The first documentary record that I can trace of a prison in Wellington is in 1849. From the record it would seem that all classes of prisoners, including lunatics, were housed together. The prisoners were employed repairing the public streets of the city, and generally, the conditions were similar to those obtaining in the English prisons at the time. ■ • • 1

THE COMMISSION OF 1868. “Prior to the passing of the Gaolers Act, 1858, the control of prisons and appointment of gaolers was vested in the Superintendents of the Provinces, but owing to the inconsistencies and irregularity of the treatment of prisoners, and the fact that the Judges had from time to time reported on the unsatisfactory position, a Royal Commission was set up in 1868 to inquire into the state of affairs.

“The general conclusions of the Commission were that the existing law relating to prisons was unnecessarily complicated, indefinite, and not understood; that illegal practices resulted, and that conditions varied substantially in different parts of the colony. The Commission was definitely of the opinion that the law should be consolidated, and control centralised in one authority. The Commission was of the opinion that in none; of the existing prisons in the colony was any system of punishment carried out which, to any appreciable extent, served the real ends of the criminal law; that the punishments were neither afflictive nor irksome, neither deterrent nor reformatory; that the existing position tended to corrupt' and demoralise; and that the prisons were training schools for the creation and maintenance of criminal classes; that the conditions in the prisons were entirely unsatisfactory; that there was no provision for the separation of juvenile offenders from other convicts, nor of the separation of men awaiting trial from convicted prisoners. It was considered that the habit of permitting prisoners to work in the streets was most objectionable, as notorious criminals became the object of morbid curiosity 'and created an unwholesome familiarity, particularly with the younger members of the public; that the labour was not sufficiently irksome, and the treadmill crank and shot drill were advocated; that discipline should be' severe—and not relaxed—was particularly stressed, and that as a tempers./ expedient, the convicts of the worst character and those under longer sentence should be drafted from the various local gaols into hulks. ■ “As a result of this Commission little was done, and matters were allowed more or less to drift, until in 1878 a special Parliamentary Committee was set up to inquire into the state of the gaols of the colony. This committee’s report largely confirmed the Commission’s findings, stating that little or nothing had been done towards the classification of prisoners. . . . “As the outcome of the committee’s report, the Government decided to reorganise the prison system, and centralise control, and arranged to bring Captain Hume from England to carry out this work. Captain Hume was a great believer in the classification of prisoners, and in his first report advocated separate

confinement,'and particularly drew attention to the iniquity of sending young children to prison. In his report for 1886 he drew attention to the fact that as many as forty children under the age of ten years had passed through the prisons during that year. He was a staunch advocate of the use of the birch rod, was opposed to the educating of prisoners, and did not believe in the granting of any privileges such as the issue of tobacco. His attitude reflected the attitude of the time in England. At the same time much credit is due to New Zealand’s first prison administrator. He established the first treeplanting camp at Waiotapu, and the first road-making camp near Milford. He also advocated the establishment of prison farms. It was during his period of office that'the First Offenders Probation Act was passed.

“In 1905 Captain Hume recommended statutory provision for the segregation and indeterminate detention of habitual criminals. The Habitual Criminal Act was passed the following year. In 1920, the Offenders Probation Act was passed extending probation to all classes of offenders—it hitherto applied only to first offenders—and in 1924 the Prevention of Crime (Borstal Institutions Establishment) Act, following the . English Act, was, passed. In 1928 the Mental Deficiency Amendment Act was passed providing for the establishment of clinics, and for farm colonies for feeble-minded.

PRISON RECEPTIONS DECREASE. 1 “Under the present method of classification we have all youthful offenders, to avoid their contamination with older offenders, sent to the Borstal institu»tions where they receive treatment appropriate to their age. It is found that the most hopeful results are to be achieved by subjecting youths, while their minds are still plastic, to reformative influences, and when it is borne in mind only 14 per cent, again appear before the Courts, the results speak for themselves. Old and senile offenders are detained at Wanganui gaol, where the conditions are more suited to their physical and mental condition. The more dangerous criminals and those whose records show that they cannot with safety to the community be given the liberties afforded at the farms, are detained at Mount Eden. The sexually depraved are segregated at New Plymouth, where/there are special facilities for supervision, and. where the medical officer is a qualified psychiatrist. The more trusted and younger offenders, who are too old for the Borstal, are sent to the farms and camps where they are employed on useful constructive work under conditions that are healthful and reformative. The results generally may be gauged from the fact that'there has been a drop in the prison receptions since the immediate pre-war years from 31* per 10,000 of the general population to 17 per 10,000 for last year. “The system of useful employment of prisoners is not only reflected in greater enthusiasm on the part of the prisoners in carrying out tne work allotted to them, and thereby stimulating habits of industry, but it is reflected in the financial results. The amount earned by the effective marshalling or prison* labour last year, notwithstanding the depression, was £55,000, and to this extent the taxpayer was saved the cost of the upkeep of prisoners.”