PENAL JURISDICTION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 12646, 2 June 1919, Page 4

PENAL JURISDICTION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—Observing the criticism regarding penalties imposed by the Stipendiary Magistrate, it might, in fairness to that official, bo pointed out that it is difficult, iu fact, impossible, for the outside public to gauge adequate punishment for certain offences against society. The Magistrate is doubtless influenced by circumstances, etc., attending each case. Admitted that a £lO fine for using obscene language does on the face appear severe, in fact, unparalleled during my forty years’ perusal of newspapers, permit me to suggest that tli© local Magistrate might, with benefit to himself (and certainly to certAin classes of offenders), make himself better acquainted with a standard work, “The.Ethics of Jurisprudence.” Logical deduction from its pages exhibit that as Licensing Magistrate he authorises the sale of not only intoxicating liquor, but stuff which is a veritable insult to the good name of wholesome beer. Recently the writer " sampled ” at Lytelton beer which was liquid brass flavoured with sour soapsuds to give it the requisite “head.” Now, if tho writer were guilty of language portraying in appropriate realistic terms the “ slush ” referred to, the penal statutes would prove inadequate, and the Magistrate handicapod to know what penalty to impose. Moral:—lf the Licensing Bench do not carry out their honndeii duty to have the liquor they license publicans to sell repeatedly tested as to purity and wholesomeness, and to allow thirsty “lumpers” to imbibe such vile concoctions, rendering them temporarily insane, thus legally the Licensing Magistrate is constructively an “ accessory before the fact,” and should he penalised accordingly. Any man absorbing a pint of sitclii licmor above referred to would no more be responsible for language, however lurid, than an inmate of Sunnyside. I am, etc., LEX.