614824-1930-Supplementary-Draft-Bills--Pawnbrokers-Criminal-Procedure-Amendment-Public-Health-and-Buildings-Amendment — Page 14

707

6. Sub-section (1) of section 79 of the principal Ordi- nance provides that upon conviction of any person of any indictable offence, the court may order any property found in his possession, or in the possession of any other person for him, to be delivered to the person entitled thereto. Sub-section (2) of the same section provides that when any person is convicted of having stolen or dishonestly obtained any property, and it appears that the property has been pawned, the court may order the delivery of the property to the owner, either on payment of the loan or part thereof or without payment. The sub-section goes on to provide that with certain small exceptions no order made under this section is to affect the rights of the parties. The effect of this appears to be that an order made under this section may be wholly disregarded by the owner, and that even if the pawnbroker has to hand over the pro- perty he still preserves any rights of action which he had in respect of the property. In connection with this, see Leicester & Co. v. Cherryman (1907) 2 K.B. 101. It seems desirable, however, that if an order of this kind is made it should be final. The same point arises on section 24 of the Pawnbrokers Ordinance, 1860, Ordinance No. 1 of 1860. That section is being altered in a new Pawnbrokers Ordinance which will be intro- duced at the same time as this Ordinance. The new sec- tion will provide that if any such order is made it shall bar any other civil remedy. It is, however, provided that both the owner and the pawnbroker must be given an opportunity of being heard before any such order is made. Accordingly section 8 of this Ordinance repeals sub-section (2) of section 79 of the principal Ordinance, and makes the general power given by sub-section (1) of that section subject to the provisions of the new Pawnbrokers Ordinance.

7. Section 9 abolishes the old presumption of law that an offence committed by a wife in the presence of her husband is committed under the husband's coer- cion, but it provides that, except in the cases of treason or murder, it shall be a good defence to prove that the offence was committed in the presence of, and under the coercion of the husband. The law on this point was altered in the United Kingdom by the Criminal Justice Act, 1925, and it seems desirable that this Colony should follow suit.

8. Sentences of imprisonment do not always involve hard labour nor do they always run from the first day of the session. It is therefore considered desirable that the Superintendent of Prisons should be definitely in- formed as to each case so that no misapprehension can arise. Accordingly section 10 of this Ordinance sub- stitutes a new form for Form 5 in the Schedule to the principal Ordinance.

September, 1930.

C. G. ALABASTER,

Attorney General.

: