ON PRISON BREAKING

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 234, 8 February 1911, Page 8

ON PRISON BREAKING

JUDGE'S ANALYTICAL COMMENTS. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Christehurch, February 0. An interesting case was dealt with in the Supreme Court to-day. Alfred Prior and William Newton were presented for sentence for escaping from custody. The prisoners were on the West Coast at the time of their escape, and were at liberty for some little time before being recaptured. When asked in Court what they had to say, 'both the prisoners replied that they had an easy chance to escape, and the temptation was so great that they could not resist taking advantage of the opportunity. His Honor, Mr. Justice Denniston, in passing sentence, said that he had never held that the offence of breaking prison, standing by itself, was one which should be treated'as any great moral offence. It was a thing that a man did naturally, and its only offence against morality was that it was the duty of every man to keep the law. The prisoners had stated the position very fairly when they said they only did what the ordinary man would have done if he had been sentenced to two years' imprisonment. The offence was not necessarily anything more than a breach of the statutory pro" vision that it was the duty of every man to obey. On the other hand, the fact that 'a man would be punished if captured was part of the legal means of detaining prisoners, just as much as were gaols, cells, and warders. The right to punish escapees was one of the restraints used to prevent escapes; therefore it was the duty of the Court, when administering the law, to give effect to one of the deterrents which the law had imposed in order to prevent others fromi escaping. There were various circumstances to be considered when dealing with escapees. A man might commit a! deed of violence, or he might escape when taking advantage of some indulgence—a man might escape from treeplanting camps, and thus commit the additional impropriety of taking advantage of an indulgence. The prisoners, however, were in the corridor of a small I wooden building, and they broke out of ( it. That'was the sum and substance of their oirence. The Court was therefore entitled to inflict a lenient sentence. The case would be nrct by the infliction of a sentence of three months' imprisonment, to commence at the expiration of their present terms.