, 1891-04-29
ST o@o1x Aw1 s

conIpanying note from a proprietor bat to go
further and enact that the meat, flesh or any
part Of any animal, must not be offered for
sale without the proposed restrictions is
scarcely warrantable; no one would then
have the right of selling for instance kids or
goats etc. without a note from a proprietor
such an enactment would not be in accord
snce with the Ordinance Of 9Th Sept. 1853,
which gives everybody the right to slaughter
small animals without a burgher brief, and
for an alteration with regard to this there
does not seem to be sufficient reason - Then
comes 4 3 which is the most important item
Of all in the proposed Draft. It is said there,
that any person found guilty of stealing sugar
canes or sugar plants on the fields, or grass
or tops on the fields or provision grounds,
shall be punished with so days hard labour
for the first time, so days for the second, 80
days for the third, and so on, ad infnitum
and to this he must object. There are in our
criminal laws penal enactments for the crime
of theft, particularly in the Ordinance of 18th
April 1910, which is extended to these Islands.
In S l of. the Ordinance the penalty is pre-
scribed for thefts of a more serious nature
whereas s 80 of the Ordinance mentions the
punishment for petty thefts. The stealing of
fruit, provisions and such things Of small
consequence will generally be considered to
be a petty theft, but if it is done to a greater
extent or for certain purposes, then the
punishment prescribed in S l of the Ordi-
nance should be inflicted. If, to name an
instance, "a person has stolen a quantity of
ctnes, he would likely be punished according
to S l, whereas s 80 often might be used in
cases when only FL. one cane is stolen.- 1t
is sometimes very difficult to decide, if a
theft is to be judged according to s l or to
5 80, and the decision rests with the Courts of
I1ot1oo thn TOur0 6No,uAo o~I L
Courts but there is no necessity for altering
the existing laws concerning the crime of
stealing, and there are weighty objections to
the prescription in the Draft of Ordinance,
that ..thefts of sugar ..canes, grass or proyi-
slOns under all circumstances shall be punish
cd so severely as proposed by the honoura-
BILE Member. The Draft contains further.
more a clause prescribing that when the costs
and damages in such criminal suits according
to-a sentence cannot be collected from the
convicted party, then the Policemaster shall
have authority to place the party to suitable
work on an estate, and the payment for that
work shall be applied to cover the costs, dam
ages and court expenses. after deducting a
suitable amount for his food.
THIS is an entirely new rule. There are
prescriptions about how costs and damages in
public suits are to be recovered, and it is not
feasible to make new rules for particular cases.
Moreover there are already in the Va grancV
Law enactnnsnts to the effect, that the Police
masters shall see that a person after serving
his punishment obtains fixed employment.
and if the person cannot himself fnd work.
then the polieemaster must assign work to
him To go further in forcible measures would
be against the principles of the laws.
Finally there is the 4th paragraph of the
Draft here it is proposed, then whenever an
estate.lahOurer who has contracted for work on.
an estate for a time beyond a i month, quits tho
estate, wherehe is employed, before the tx.
piration of the contract, he shall be seized and
punished for fraudulent conduct. There are,
however, already in the Servants Act, of 1879,
@nactments to meet such cases s IL of that
Act prescrihes, that a servant leaving: his en-
ploy Illegally shall be fnedSand besides by the
Pohcenaakterts be enfoined to RETURN to his EN-
plOE and ifhed does not obey. then he shall be
liable to punishment ON bread and water or to
penal ssryitude for q aertain time. K 4his enact
msat is perhaps often difficult to carry cut
is Certainly so, that the 1abouriRg classes
okteRAo not respect the contraets entered into
by them, but planters nanst try to help them,
9~elvesawithsthe existing laws, and there arg NO
prospects, that this new rule, proposed in the
Draft OF Ordinance, could be entertained. He
the acting Vice Governor, would finally say,
chat be supposed. that a Committee would be
appointed to consider the Draft. and he would