CO885(2-3) — Page 406

26

to bo* for minor offences committed by an offender convicted after two or more previous convictions, the peual imprisonment should be neither more nor less rigorous than it now is for like offences, but of shorter duration. And again, when imprisonment is awarded not for life but for terms of years, the total imprisonment- should be lengthened and the penal imprison- ment shortened.

I proposed this system partially, ie, as appli cable to twice or thrice convicted criminals, in a letter to Mr. Gladstone, published in December 1868, and Lord Kimberley, when bringing the Habitual Criminals' Bill of 1869 into the House of Lords, mentioned some apparent objections, which, however, he proceeded rather to answer than to insist upon; and the reason for which he abstained from adopting it seemed to be chiefly that the public mind was not prepared for it.

Some objections had been made on the ground Objections to protective imprison-

• Livingston's Code, which is exceptionally lenient in respect of other indictions, affords a precedent for this: Those who are confined for a repetition of minor offences are considered more in the light of incurables than of atrocious offenders."— ("Introduction to the Code of Prison Discipline," pages 38, 39.) "If any person, having been twice previously convicted of crimes, no matter of what nature, shall a third time he convicted of any crime afterwards committed, he shall be considered as unfit for society, and be imprisoned in the Penitentiary for life."— (Penal Code, Ch. 4, page 14.) But this perpetual imprisonment for repeated offence does not differ in any of its stages from the same stages of temporary imprisonment inflicted for the like offences oner committed; and in this I think the Code errs greatly on the sisle of severity.

ment answered.

27

of leniency; but the objectors on this ground had of course overlooked the condition that penal imprisonment was to precede the protective. Others objected to prolonged, and especially to life- long, imprisonment, under whatever conditions,

on the ground of undue severity; alleging that, do what you will to alleviate the sorrows and dreari- ness of prolonged confinement, it cannot but be an intolerable state of existence.

The recent annals of crime in England, unless recent English experience is supposed to be exceptional, will furnish, I conceive, a clear and conclusive answer to the objection of severity in the proposed system as compared with the present. Upon the present, long years are passed in prison, and they are passed in penal imprison- ment, under sentences for offences which are not,

as well as for offences which are, heinous. All the statistical data that night be desired, are not per- haps forthcoming, but those which

are,

will suffice

to point to the true conclusion, They who object

to prolonged protective imprisonment, should inquire how much of the lives of our criminals twice and thrice convicted, are passed in penal imprisonment.

Cases are repeatedly occurring in Courts of Justice, of which I will adduce the following as a sample:-In fourteen years, Thomas Smith has been nine times convicted, and sentenced to terms of imprisonment, which, added together, make thirteen years and nearly four months, record is as follows: -

The

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

|2|3|

Reference :-

C.O.885

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON