FLOGGING SENTENCE

Wairarapa Times-Age, 1 August 1941, Page 7

FLOGGING SENTENCE

FOR MURDEROUS ASSAULT ON WARDERS GOVERNMENT RECOMMENDS REMISSION. DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON. This Day. The Government has decided to recommend the remission of the sentence of flogging imposed on four prisoners for assaults on warders in the Auckland Gaol. A statement to this effect was made by the Minister of Justice, Mr Mason, replying to a question asked by Mr Endean (Opposition, Remuera).’ The Government’s recommendation, Mr Mason said, in the House of Representatives' yesterday, was based on opposition to flogging as a form of punishment. The Minister's answer, said Mr Endean, was far from satisfactory. He believed that any person in New'Zealand with legal experience would say that one of the f aults ot the Government was its inability and indisposition' to exact the discipline necessary for the maintenance of law and order. ... An Opposition member: “And to see that innocent people are p rotected! Mr Endean recalled that at one time sand-bagging was prevalent m. Manchester; citizens were not free from assaults in the streets. Then a judge ordered flogging, and sand-baggin-, ceased. “The punishment of flogging is still on the Statute Book in New Zealand,” he added. “Let the Government enforce it, or take it off the Statute Book.” He did not desire to see punishment inflicted, but he did desire to see the country free from murderous attacks. “One prisoner who assaulted a warder was himself convicted for murder,” he continued. “He was there on the licence that rhe Government seems to hand out ■ to all criminals.” The facts as he had heard them were most alarming. The murderer, referring to the warder—a man who was protecting society—had said: “I hope the gentleman (using an Australian adjective) dies.” It was necessary to face the question of discipline in New Zealand, Mr Endean observed. He had been told that the reason why so many cars were converted in the Dominion was that young men said to themselves: “I'll get probation.” That was a disgrace. In Suva when a member of the New Zealand foivco converted a car he got six months. “The Government has got to see that citizens obey the law and that other people are protected, ’ said Mr Endean. “I think this is the most heinous, foul crime ever committed in the history of New Zealand.” Mr McCombs (Government, Lyttelton) said that savagery of punishment did not prevent crime. What prevented crime was certainty of detection. Government members: “Hear, hear!” Mr McCombs argued that the hanging of thieves in Britain did not stop thieving, but the certainly of their being caught did. It would be interesting to know, he said, just what training in the psychological effects of the punishments they imposed the judges possessed. Mr Harker (Opposition, Waipawa) said that the Minister of Justice in his reply and Mr McCombs had missed the real point. To suggest that there was anything in the nature of savagery in the sentences passed by the trial judge and the Court of Appeal was wrong. It imputed to the judges a sentiment entirely absent from tneii minds. The trial judge was one of the most humane men in the country, and one who had made a study of the effects of punishment. The first purpose of punishment was to prevent crime. In imposing sentence of imprisonment for the Mt. Eden crime the Courts took into account the number of strokes to be given in the flogging. It might be desirable, therefore, that if the flogging was remitted the Court of Appeal should have opportunity to review the gaol sentence imposed. . Mr McCombs (Government, Wellington Suburbs) said that if the flogging' was carried cut it would not prevent a repetition of the crime. What would prevent it would be a change of arrangements at the gaol which made an. impulsive crime of this sbrt possible.