THE PRISONS BOARD.

Waimate Daily Advertiser, Volume XXIV, 21 December 1926, Page 7

THE PRISONS BOARD.

ITS POWERS TO REILEASE PRISONERS. ECHO OF THE BALW-CAS® (Special to the “Daily Adveetirer"). 1 WELLINGTON, This Day.. “The Prisons Board’s pow&resiw regard to its recommendations for remission of sentence, either By release on probation or complete discharge, are very large. In it the Gov' ernment has "vested its authority tin me'niew all direct sentences. Ulually the Board’s powers of recommendation. are exercised only on a defiiiitesystem- as to the proportion of: has sentence a prisoner must serve" before- he is. eligible for consideration), but ira eases that appear to -merit earlier attention owing to special' eireirmusifiiirrees, the Board is always prepared t® review a sentence, and’ if it deems it wise to do so, to -recommend; nnnuediate release on probation or discharge—even if a long sentence Bas only run a few months. There aire occasions when such' a* coiirse is 1 necessary in the interests of justice and humanity, and the Board never hesitates to exercise the discretion given it in dealing with l such: cases. ’’’

The above is an extract from an address- given by’ the late Mr. C. E. Matthews when Controller-General of Prisons,. to> the Wellington Justices’ Association in 1923, and quoted by the present president of the Prisons Board, Mr. Justice Stringer, in his repwt if® the Minister of Justice, to show that the procedure and policy’ of the Board in regard to the release of prisoners was a definitely established practice. Mr. Stringer, in his report, dealt with tile constitution and functions of the Prisons Board, the method and procedure adopted by the Board, and results of the Board's operations. Dealing with the functions of the Board, the report stated that the principle had definitely been laid down by the Court of Appeal that when- a: sentence of reformative detention’ was imposed it was not contemplated that the prisoner would be detained for the whole term. That term was fixed merely as a maximum period for which he may be detained. Section 15 of the Prevention- of Crime Act prescribed that release-on-license- could be granted at any timeif there was reasonable probability that the offender would abstain from crime and lead a useful and indtfs(rimislife. Under such license, liow ever the person so released may.- bearrested at any time without warrant and returned to a Borstal'liistitution, It will thus be seen that n> lease on license is by no means- tiegranting of unconditoinal libarty. The results of the Board’s operations showed that of the total number of 90 released since ttia- coming into force of the Prevention of Crime Act, only 4 have subsequently effended.

In quoting specific oases, Mr. Stringer pointed out in tfie Ba-ume case that the jury by their verdiet found that Baume had “engineered” the scheme of falsely acquiring the money from the Post o’ffiee- Savings Bank, and the Judge approved the finding. The jury alsa recommended Baume for mercy on aceo-u-n-t of his youth In passing sentence the Judge said that in his opinion the fraudulent scheme initiated by Banme was due to the latter’s vanity rather than his cupidity, and mentioned to the prisoner that his sentence would no doubt be shortened if his conduct in the Borstal Institution showed that he desired to re-establish himself. Baume petitioned the Board for release urging that employment of a literary character had been obtained for him in Australia by his brother. The petition was deferred from time to time till August 26th when th-: Board was satisfied that the offender would abstain from further crime and lead a useful and industrious life and unanimously recommended that the accused be released upon probationary license with permission to leave Nev- Zealand to take up the offered employment. One of the Board’s reasons for making the recommendation was that his punishment had been severe owing to the degradation and his exclusion from his profession, in which he had every indication of experiencing a brilliant career. It was in the best interests of the accused and the community that he should be allowed the earliest opportunity of makin 1 * a fresh start in life. In the case of Charles Evan Mack ay xvho was sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment (for attempted murder, the ex-idence showed that the act was an impulsive one. The petitions of Mackay’s relations for

jllas release did not receice favour 'able consideration until June Ist, ,1926, when it was considered that jMaiekay had already suffered exitremely severe punishment. Signs -of degeneration both in mind and body were becoming more and more ! apparent, and it was thought that. > unless be were granted an early re- ! lease he xvould become incapable of earning a living and would become ‘a charge on the State. Furthermore, ; his sister was prepared to take , charge of him and set him up in an: occupation in a new environment-

Taking the case of Selwyn Baker, who was sentenced to two years’ reformative treatment for indecent- assault, Mr Stringer pointed out that the assaults were only of a trivial character. In describing the allfeged assault upon her, eqch female said either that “he lifted up my clothes” o> that “he pulled up my frock,-.” The act was nothing more than-some- obscure sex impulse, which at' hi's age, and in the absence of proper adviee and instruction, was not unlikely to develop, The youth’s general character was highly satisfiwfawyRepresentations were made to the Board by the Rev. Mr M’alden, viear of St. Chad's, at which church the youth was organist, and' the vestry of St. Chad’s. The Prisons Board was satisfied that it was in the best interests of the youth, and not in any way inimical to society that he should be restored to the- custody and care of his father and be brought under the moral influence- of his friends, who undertook to supervise and instruct him, and the Board, therefore, recommended his release. Reports since had fully justified the course.