The Globe. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1878.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1450, 9 October 1878, Page 2

The Globe. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1878.

The presentment made by the Grand Jury to bis Honor seems to suggest that an alteration is necessary in tbe law relating to larceny from the person. In the case wliicb drew from tbe Grand Jury tbe expression of opinion contained in their presentment the sum stolen was £l. Under any other circumstances tbe case would have been dealt with by the magistrate summarily, and tbe expense to the country, caused by tbe putting in motion tbe machinery of tbe Supreme Court, would have been saved. But, as pointed out by bis Honor, this being a case of larceny from the person was entirely—as to the tribunal before which it could be tried —different to one of simple larceny. By law larceny from tbe person is made a felony, and is punishable by penal servitude for not less than three nor more than fourteen years. No distinction, it will be seen, is made as to value as is the case with simple larceny. In cases of the latter, unless the articles stolon be over the value of £5, the Resident Magistrate has power to deal summarily, and thus save the country the expense of a Supreme Court trial. But when the larceny committed is from the person, oven of so small a sum as that pointed out by the Grand Jury, the magistrate has no option but to send the case for trial. The inconvenience of this course is too plain to require comment. The time of the Court and of those concerned in the cases is unnecessarily taken up in dealing with what properly comes within the scope of a police magistrate’s duties. His Honor expressed no opinion as to whether the District Court could deal with these cases, it not being in operation here, but the presumption is that it could not. The powers of the District Court are limited to the imposition of sentences up to seven years. But the law, as regards larceny from the person, gives a discretionary power to award a sentence up to fourteen years. The question therefore arises whether this class of cases must not, unless some alteration is made, continue to ho sent to the Supremo Court? If, as we are inclined to believe, they must, then the time has arrived for an alteration in the law. This alteration should follow the same Une as cases of simple larceny, and the Resident Magistrate should have power to deal summarily with cases up to five pounds. Above that sum, as in. larceny cases a committal to the Supreme Court should be made. It would be useless to expect any reform in this direction during the present session, but now that public attention had been called to tho anomaly that exists by so important a body as tho Gril«4 Jury, we hope tho Government will seriously consider tho question during the recess. The Attorney-General has shown himself to bo thoroughly alive to tho necessity for many social and legal reforms, and wo tvust ho will also take steps to have tho law amended in the direction pointed out by the Grand Jury.

The mistakes in and many entries on the Jury List form a constant theme of annoyance at the .Supremo Court sessions. It appears to be almost impossible for a list to be framed with anything like accuracy, though the law has done its best to provide for such a result. At the session now in progress, juryman after juryman was excused, on the ground that their names were wrongly entered on the list. So much was this the case that the panel was very short; and any large amount of challenges iWOntld have exhausted it. By the Jury Act, IAhS the duty of compiling the jury list, so far a.; the collection of the names of those entitled to servo, is cast upon tho police. No doubt tho constable to whom is on*

trusted the formation of tlio roll, do their best to ensure accuracy, hut the result is that a large number of names which should appear on the roll are omitted altogether, and those which are entered are in many cases done so erroneously. The evil consequences arising from this wore made clear in the case occuring last session, when the fining of a juror under a wrong name seriously imperilled a verdict which had been returned in a criminal case. The necessity for a careful compilation of the jury list will thus be apparent, and it is to be hoped that a strict supervision will be exercised over it. Under the Jury Act the clerk to the Resident Magistrate is the person who acts as jury officer in making up the lists for the Sheriff, and it is therefore necessary to call that officer’s attention to the present inefficient state of the jury list, with a view to it being remedied in future. A change has been made in the Sheriff’s department here, and as the gentleman now filling that office has had large experience in the supervision and the compilation of those lists, it is to be hoped he will see that the present cause for complaint is removed during the next year. W E are glad to see that the Returning Officer carried into effect the suggestion, made in a recent article, that the result of the municipal polling should be declared next day instead of on the evening of the day of election. The result proved the wisdom of this step. Although it might bo urged that there was an absence of excitement at the last election, it is still obvious that the larrikinism rampant on a former occasion pould not be carried on in daylight. It is only whilst the darkness covers them that the persons who delight in throwing flour mil carry on their peculiar pastime. In the daylight they would Soon find themselves in the hands of the police. We hope that Christchurch will not again witness such a scene as that which occurred on the evening of the election previous to the one just closed. Now that the experiment has been tried of delaying the declaration of the poll until the next day and has proved a success, it is to be trusted that it will be generally brought into practice. No one is inconvenienced by the delay, and the candidates will be none the worse for having to wait until the next day to know the result of the election. Closely connected with this subject are the farces which are occasionally enacted under the name of public meetings to hear the opinions of the various candidates. We trust that those have also received their quietus, and that we shall hear no more of what is really nothing more nor less than a practical joke at the expense of those who may be induced to come forward with a desire to serve their fellow citizens.