PREVENTION OF CRIME. (Hansard, 27 May 1908)

§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. GLADSTONE,) Leeds, W.

In asking leave to introduce this Bill, I wish to lay strong emphasis on the fact that civilised countries are paying special attention to the prevention of crime rather than to its punishment. The Bill which I wish to submit is in two parts—the first establishes State reformatories, the second proposes more effective methods of dealing with criminals who wilfully persist in crime. Following upon the Probation Act and the Children Bill introduced this session, the first part of the Bill is the completion of a definite scheme for dealing with young offenders up to the age of twenty-one years or even a higher age. It is proposed by the Bill to establish the Borstal system formally by law, and the proposed State reformatories will be known as Borstal institutions. When a young person is convicted on indictment the Court has power to sentence him to not less than one year and not more than three years in a Borstal institution; but difficulty has arisen under the tentative system, because Courts could not have full knowledge of the main characteristics of an offender or of his fitness for the special treatment and training provided in such an institution. The Bill provides, therefore, that Courts shall pronounce alternative sentences of penal servitude or imprisonment, so that if it is clearly evident that the subject of the sentence is not fit for the Borstal treatment, then the alternative system may come into force. The age under the Bill ranges from sixteen to twenty-one years, and power is given to the Secretary of State in certain cases to extend that age, and powers are also given to the Secretary of State and to the Prison Commissioners to transfer prisoners from prison to the Borstal Institution, either for the whole or for part of the sentence. There is also power to acquire land, to erect buildings, 1122 and to make regulations. Power is given to the Secretary of State in the case of incorrigibles to commute the unexpired residue of the Borstal detention to a term of imprisonment in no case exceeding the unexpired residue. On the other hand the Secretary of State is to have power after six months' Borstal detention to release on licence and on probation, if the character of the prisoner seems to deserve it. These are the main provisions of Part I. of the Bill, and they are, I hope, thoroughly non-contentious. But now I come to the second part, which, undoubtedly, raises a new question, on which there may be genuine and, perhaps, strong differences of opinion. But the proposals are the outcome of careful study and long consideration. A Court, on the finding of a jury, is to have power to sentence an habitual criminal to a term of preventive detention, which will continue until the man gives bona fide and sufficient assurance that he will take to an honest life, or until by age or infirmity he becomes physically incapable of resuming a life of crime. In no case, therefore, is life imprisonment contemplated, and I wish to direct attention to the fact that it will be open to any man to secure his discharge on reasonable conditions. What is the general reason of this change in the law? The present system is sufficiently deterrent to 50 or 60 per cent. of prisoners; but it is not deterrent to two classes. The first of these is that class which is a nuisance rather than a danger to the State, those who are criminals chiefly because of physical or mental deficiency rather than by reason of a settled intention to pursue a life of crime. For that class the present system is not the right one. I am not in a position to deal with that large subject at the moment; but I hope before long a new and more appropriate system will be set up for those persons. A second and far smaller class of prisoners consists of more formidable offenders, men who are physically fit, who take to crime by preference, decline work when it is offered them, and refuse the helping hand. They laugh at the present system of imprisonment; and when they leave prison it is practically certain that they will return sooner or later. Speaking generally, men belonging to this class 1123 when in prison are excellently behaved; they are orthodox worshippers in chapel, and in many cases are regular attendants at Communion. Let me present one object lesson to the House. Every night 8,000 police march from the stations to their beats in the Metropolis. That large number is needed because there are at large in London some hundreds of potential housebreakers, whose avowed and known object is plunder. There are, perhaps, in some of the suburban districts fifty policemen watching, possibly, for one burglar. For each man caught the whole machinery for detection and punishment has to be set in motion and at great expense—the expense of detection, arrest, summary proceedings, trial, conveyance in custody, and, at last, imprisonment. For these men the present system of punishment is little better than a farce. The Government propose that, when a person is convicted on indictment of a crime and is sentenced to penal servitude, if the jury find, as a fact, that he is an habitual criminal, the Court may pass a further sentence, but they must first be satisfied that, by reason of his criminal antecedents and his mode of life, it is expedient for the protection of the public that he should be kept in detention for a longer period. The charge, therefore, has to be separately stated in the indictment, and the jury will have to be satisfied, first, that the man just convicted of an offence has been convicted of at least three serious crimes, and, secondly, that when convicted he was persistently leading an habitually dishonest life. That charge of habitualism can not be made except by the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The main reason for this is the necessity for a close and accurate scrutiny as to whether a man's criminal record prima facie justifies the charge. With regard to the definition of crime, we take it from the Prevention of Crimes Act, 1871. The man will have an unqualified right of appeal. After serving his term of penal servitude he will be committed to a place of detention, and that will be a prison specially adapted for the purposes of the Bill, situated in the Isle of Wight, about half a mile distant from Parkhurst Prison. We propose that the prison discipline should be less rigorous than that now prevailing, alike as regards hours, 1124 talking, recreative occupations, and food. Under the rules a man by good conduct will be able to rise to a privileged class. He will have regular work within the precints of the prison, and he will be able to earn wages. He will not be there as a hopeless offender, but from the first every effort will be made to reclaim him. Now I come to the all-important point, and that is: How will the fitness for discharge be determined? This is what we propose. First of all, there will be the general supervision of the directors, who will report regularly to the Secretary of State as regards a man's conduct and industry, and there will be the general supervision of the Secretary of State himself. Secondly, there will be a board of visitors to hear complaints and investigate grievances. Thirdly, we propose to establish a special committee to consider individual cases at regular intervals. The committee will consist of the Governor, some members of the board of visitors, and any other members it is thought necessary to add. There will be at least two statutory meetings per annum of this committee for the purpose of reporting to the Secretary of State on the individual cases of those under detention. That is what we propose, but I agree that the House may probably wish to be satisfied that no man will be kept in prison subject only to official supervision, and I am ready within reason to consider any proposal which will meet the wishes of the House on that subject; but I would also impress upon hon. Members that my intention in proposing this Bill is that, while the system is for the prevention of crime, it is also to be used for the reclamation of even the very worst offenders. The House will observe that before a man enters on his detention period we have these safeguards first, the Public Prosecutor; secondly, the jury; thirdly, the view of the Judge; fourthly, the Court of Criminal Appeal; fifthly, the Secretary of State. After conviction we have, first, the constant supervision of the Secretary of State; secondly, the reports and recommendations of the prison authorities; thirdly, the routine inspection by the board of visitors; fourthly, the special committee to report at least twice a year as to those under detention, These 1125 are the principal provisions. Hope and not fear is the best antidote to criminal habits. A man will not lose hope, and men would not be allowed to lose hope when they entered this place of detention. The system we are proposing differs absolutely from the present penal system of long and inevitable periods of detention, for it enables a man to effect his own release. No doubt discharges must be to some extent experimental, but any proved and serious breach of the conditions of the licence will mean arrest and return to the place of detention. We do not anticipate that the mere withdrawal of habitual criminals will achieve our object or will have a sensible influence on crime. We attach far more importance to the deterrent effect of the powers given by this Bill. Men of this class for whose benefit this Bill is designed are usually skilled and competent, and, if they think fit, they will have no difficulty in earning an honest livelihood. Our object is to prove to these men that a life of crime will not pay, and that such a life can only end in detention involving hard work and loss of liberty. If I am told that this is a new departure, my reply is that it is a necessary consequence of the wiser and more humane treatment now being adopted for the benefit of prisoners generally. We have reached a point at which the present prison treatment does not deter those who are attracted by, and deliberately take up, a life of crime. If the Bill provides severer treatment for a small minority of prisoners, it is at the same time a guarantee for the continuance of progressive improvement in our prisons for the benefit of the large majority of the inmates. In presenting this scheme to the House I make no apology for the introduction of a new principle in our penal system. On the contrary, I believe that in this principle and in the extension of it will be found the solution of some of the most difficult problems in the treatment of crime. The prevention of crime through reforming agencies underlies the establishment of State reformatories, and the same method, adapted to different circumstances, is the basis, and, I submit, the true justification, of preventive detention. I ask leave to introduce this Bill.