Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. THURSDAY, JULY 25, 1901. PROTECTION OF THE YOUNG.

Greymouth Evening Star, Volume XXXI, 25 July 1901, Page 2

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. THURSDAY, JULY 25, 1901. PROTECTION OF THE YOUNG.

On the training of the youth depends the welfare of colony and it incumbent on the State to see as far as possible that the youth is surrounded by as many safeguards, without being irksome and the suspicion of restraint, as possible. Youth is at all times weak, and the tendency to evil is an inperent one in human nature, hence the necessity for protection against the snares and pitfalls that lead in the direction of larrikinisra and crime. The Legislature is well aware of the necessity of preventive measures to check the growing evil, and according y on Thursday evening the ’Minister for Education, moved a second reading of the Young Persons’ Protection Bill. He said he hoped that it would bo none the less acceptable because it was an old friend. Its object was to prevent undue frequenting of the streets by young persons, and to prevent them from going on to worse things; also, to put those who had been contaminated out of the way of contamination. The Bill did not tend to create a criminal class. It was much the same as iho measure which passed the Council last session, except that in the former Bill it was left to any police officer, or warrant issued by a Magistrate, or a Justice of the Peace, to search any building suspected of harbouring young persons for immoral purposes ; whereas now

the power of issuing such warrant was confined to a Magistrate. Some little opposition as might have been expected was experienced in regard to the Bill, the Hon Mr M’Lean questioning if the Bill was placed on the Statute Book, whether it would not become an inoperative measure like the Inebriates Homes Act. It might influence a child’s future. This is what is wanted, although the Hon Mr M’Lean did not see it in that light. It is the future that the Ministry is endeavouring to deal with—to remove as far as possible contaminatory influences. As a matter of course the irreconcilable Mr. Scotland was also opposed to the Bill as were also several other members. It was urged that a great source of evil was the allowing by parents of children of tender years to wander about uncontrolled after nightfall, and if the police bad power to arrest them and take them home to their parents much evil might bo prevented. It was not necessary if an enquiry was requisite that it should bo conducted in an open Court. In replying to the objections, the Minister in charge of the Bill said that there were no new arguments to meet, but only the same old bogeys. There was no denying i that children in our cities led an openf air life, and often a loitering one. There was no call for the inspector to interfere with harmless amusements, such as the playing of a game of football on a moonlight night, but it was a different case when the inspector knew that the children were getting into mischief. The taking charge of a child and handing him to his guardian would not effect that child’s future. Almost the last act in the procedure under the Bill was the bringing of the parent before the Magistrate, and he was sorry that the parent was not brought in earlier. Ultimately the Bill was carried by the overwhelming majority of 30 to 6. It is to be hoped that the good sense of the Lower House will allow the Bill to pass as something is necessary to check the freedom and license existing among the extreme youth of the colony. We do not for one moment say that it is possible for an Act of Parliament to make the youth of this colony “honest, just, good, and wise,” but it is possible to prevent the spread of contaminating influence that is too often fostered by nightfall. Children ought to be in bed instead of being allowed to roam the streets unchecked at unseemly hours unquestioned, without let or hindrance.