§ 18. Mr. LAWSONasked the Home Secretary if his attention has been called to the eases of three 16-year-old boys who were sentenced at South Shields to three months' imprisonment; is he aware that these boys are first offenders but are at present in Durham gaol; and will he review the cases with a view to remission of the sentences?
§ Sir H. SAMUELThese boys admitted a series of thefts from shops extending over a period of months: Turnbull 13 offences, Sloan seven, and Lloyd six. The boys were all in regular employment at the time. The South Shields justices, who are accustomed to make full use of the Probation of Offenders Act, considered that its application was not suitable in these cases, particularly in view of the large number of offences of this character which were being committed by youths in the district. After a careful examination of all the circumstances, including consultation with the justices and the prison authorities, I regret I can find no sufficient ground for interfering with the decision of the court.
§ Mr. LAWSONAm I to understand that the right hon. Gentleman is going to endorse a sentence of three months' imprisonment in a great central prison for 16-year-old boys? Surely that is not in accordance with the modern outlook.
§ Sir H. SAMUELOne has to consider the alternatives that are open. This is not a case in which the boys ought to be sent to a reformatory for a long period of years, and in the opinion of the justices, with which I cannot quarrel, in view of the long continued offences, it is not a case for probation.
§ Mr. LAWSONIn view of the crime, as it is called, is not the right hon. Gentleman's decision a complete reversal of policy?