Untitled

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3492, 15 September 1882, Page 2

The main provisions of the new Justices of the Peace Ajt, that is now in force, are thus summarised by a contemporary : This measure contains the provisions of the eight existing Acts in force previous to the passing of the Consolidating Act of this session, and parts of other three Acts, together with certain provisions relating to the summary jurisdiction in cases of indictable offeuces, adopted from the recent Imperial Act, entitled, "The Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879." The Petty Sessions Acts having become practically inoperative are not embodied in the Act, nor the provisions of" The Justices of the Peace Act, 1866." There are other amendments; the Act being disembarrassed of all expressions respecting limits of jurisdiction, backing of warrants, &C, which somewhat complicated the provisions of the Act of 1866." That Act, following the Imerial Statute of 1844, assumed that the jurisdiction of the Justices would be limited to certain parts of the Colony ; but, in fact, Justices have always been appointed to have general jurisdiction, and there seems no reason to anticipate that it will be found necessary or desirable to assign specific local limitation of action. The most important alterations and amendments in the existing laws are: In the Act of 1866 no exception as to the limitation of time for laying an information when any person is charged with the commission of an offence for which he is liable to be punished upon summary conviction before Justices. The bill in this respect, following Jervois , Act provides that every such information may be laid within six raonths from the time when the matter of such information arose, except in cases where some other period of limitation is provided by the Act constituting the offence, or any other Act. Where Justices have authority to impose imprisonment or a fine or penalty for an offence punishable on summary conviction, it is proposed to j give them specific power to impose im- j prisonment without hard labour and reduce the prescribed period thereof; and in the case of a fine or penalty in respect of a first offence, to reduce the prescribed ■ amount. Where in the case of imprisonment or fine the law requires the offender to enter into his recognisance and find sureties for keeping the peace, the Justices may also dispense with such reqaireraents. Where Justices have authority to impose imprisogment and have not authority to substitute a fine, the Act prevides that they may impose a fine pot exceeding £25. Another very important provision —taken, like the tnree last cited, from "The Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879 " (42 and 43 Victoria, c. 49) is to the effect that if upon the healing of a charge for an offence punishable on summary conviction, the Justices think that though the charge is proved, the offence was of so trifling a nature that it is inexpedient to inflict any other than a nominal punishment, they may dismiss the infor-

mation without proceeding to conviction, and may order the person charged to pay damages not exceeding 40s, and the costs of the proceedings. Under similar circumstances, the justices may, upon convicting the person charged, discharge him, conditionally on his giving security to appear for sentence when called upon.