PUNISHMENT FOR THEFT.

Wanganui Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 160739, 27 August 1920, Page 2

PUNISHMENT FOR THEFT.

JUDGE’S CRITICISM OF FEILDING CASE. Percy Lancelot Ivreagher, a young man, who had pleaded guilty in the Feilding Court to theft of a case of benzine at Cheltenham on August 13, came up for sentence at the Supreme Court this morning before his Honor, Sir John Salmond. Mr W. J. Treadwell, who appeared for accused, made* an earnest appeal to his Honor not to send prisoner to gaol but to admit him to probation. He pointed out that accused, who was the son of respectable parents, and who up to the present lapse had borne a good record, came to Feilding on the night of the theft and got into bad company. The real instigator of the theft was a man named Fitzgerald, who had also been prosecuted for receiving the stolon goods and was fined £5 by the Justices before whom lie was brought, while the accused, who took the benzine at the instigation of Fitzgerald, was before the Supremo Court for sentence. Fitzgerald had suggested to accused that ho might join him in a joy ride if be could procure the benzine. Accused went into Cheltenham and broke into a store, taking two cases, and the parties went joy riding during the night. One case arid a tin had since been returned to the owner. Mr Treadwell went on to point out that the Probation Officer's report regarding prisoner was favourable. The prisoner was slightly weak intellectually, and was subject to fits and bad been under medical treatment for some time. Mr Treadwell asked his Honor not to impose a term of imprisonment, but to either inflict a fine or admit prisoner to probation. His Honor: I don’t approve of fines in cases of theft, as it seems to me to be reducing theft to the level of a by-law prosecution. '* Mr Treadwell said it was a pity to send a young man to gaol who had led a respectable life and who had fallen to a sudden temptation. The sending of a'’young man to gaol often meant the startin gpoint of a career of crime. On the other hand, being admitted to probation often acted as a warning to a young man to go straight. His Honor replied that the purpose of punishment was to deter other people from doing the same thing. What was to become of the young community, he asked, if all manner of offences of breaking and entering and stealing were to be met by a fine? It seemed to him that it -would be reducing the criminal law to a dead letter. ’After Mr Treadwell had made a further appeal on behalf of prisoner, his Honor stated that this was a painful case and he had given the best consideration he could on behalf of prisoner. He felt that to admit him to probation would be a "rave indiscretion. It would mean that the lesson would be lost to young men if they knew that they could break and enter to steal knowing that nothing would happen to them except that they would be admitted to probation so long as they had not been previously connected. He fully admitted that there wore circumstances in cases where probation should be allowed. In the present instance prisoner was not a boy but a man of 27 years. He had planned a deliberate theft before leaving Feilding. He’ went to Cheltenham to a dance and went drinking in a public bouse after hours. He did not propose to sentence prisoner to a long term of imprisonment, but he must be taught that he could not do this sort of thing. He agreed that the other man (Fitzgerald) was probably the instigator and it was a matter of surprise that having been found guilty of receiving the stolen goods the Justices thought he was adequately dealt with by a fine of £5. Prisoner was then sentenced to three months’ imprisonment.