The Daily News. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1914. MORAL OBLIQUITY.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LVI, Issue 189, 9 February 1914, Page 4

The Daily News. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1914. MORAL OBLIQUITY.

At the Xew "Plymouth sittings of Oh; Supreme Court last week an enin;j book-keeper was sentenced to tin e years' imprisonment with hard labor, with reformative treatment for a term not exceeding' live years. The amount involved in the charges was £32. The punishment cannot he said to be lenient; it errs, on the contrary, on the side of harshness, considering' the uigc of the man and the circumstances of his wrongdoing, He had, however, some black marks against him, registered as far back as in 1801, and 110 doubt this fact weighed—in our opinion unduly—with the Judge in determining the sentence. The unfortunate man evidently had 110 friends; otherwise lie. would not have been unrepresented 'bv counsel. We io not suggest that lie would in that event have escaped punishment; the case was too clearly against him for that. Nor did he deserve to escape punishment. Any person who betrays a trust and robs his masters deserves imprisonment, no matter what the circumstances mtiy "be. This leads us to our point. During the past few years there have "been, even in the towns of Northern Taranaki, many proved cases of men in positions of trust and responsibility embezzling public alia private funds. J!ut none of them have been arrested or convicted. Why? Because, being ''good fellows" (with other people's money) they had friends who came to their rescue and wielded influence sufficient to prevent the law following its proper course. It cannot he said that the cases of the embczrievs referred to urn not worse than the case 0! the man Iloskins, who got three years' hard labor and "five years' reformative treatment. Hut Hoskins stole sma'l amounts. Had he embezzled in a wholesale way and acted the ''g'ood fellow," his case may not have even come before the Court. His friends would perhaps have found the money, or part of it, and hushed tilings up. It seems to us that the people who come, to the rescue of embezzlers are entirely misguided, however well - iutentioned they may bs. A person who abuses and violates bis trust deserves the same consideration as he shows towards those whose money he misappropriates, and should be made to suffer for his wrongdoing. Unfortunately, in most cases the innocent wife and children would also have j to suffer, but there is a greater interest to consider—the well-being of the community. If it were generally know* that from detection of embezzlement Court proceedings would invariably follow, no matter the nature of the circumstances, there would be less crime of this character and fewer liats going round for money to keep the culprits out of the gaol for which they have quali- ' fied. As things arc, however, a man in a position of responsibility who "goes wrong" knows that detection will not involve his appearance before a judge, feeling 110 doubt that if the worst comes to the worst his friends will not see him disgraced by gaol. By acting as they do, therefore, the people who come to the assistance of embezzlers are really feting against the interests of the whole community, which are paramount, and should ever be safeguarded, and actually in most cases are not doing a kindness to the delinquents themselves. It is about time there was clearer and healthier thinking and less misplaced and false sentiment displayed in connection with these matters.