400
THE NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE.

(Parliamentary Copy), in its favour. "Real solitary
confinement," he writes, "would produce the same
effect on a black as on a white man:" and, indepen-
dently of Sir Francis Hincks' high reputation as a
Colonial Governor, his opinion on this question is of
peculiar weight, as the Penal Settlement of British
Guiana afforded him experience of the separate
system on a large scale, unattainable elsewhere, I
believe, in the tropical Colonies. Mr. Longden also,
now Governor of Trinidad, writing from British
Honduras, on the 22nd January, 1870 (Parl. Papers,
1870, page 4), speaks of solitary or separate confine-
ment as a more salutary punishment than corporal
punishment, and (according to his experience in
Dominica) the only punishment prisoners really fear.
Whatever may be the value of the considerations
urged against the separate system, the following
passage from a Report of a Committee of the Legisla-
tive Assembly of New South Wales points at evils in
the associated system which would go far to determine
the question between the two systems. "The brutal-
izing effect" (of association) "upon the prisoners is
admitted by all, and it is described by some as
terrible in depravity. Practices grossly obscene are
common, and on evidence possessing the consistency
of truth, and which your Committee do not feel
warranted in doubting, unnatural crimes of the deepest
dye are committed. The clergymen in attendance
complain that as the men are never alone for a single
hour during the whole time of their sentence, they
literally have no opportunity for the exercises of
religion, even if they are so disposed, and similar
complaints are made by the men themselves." (Parl.
Papers, 1868, page 102.) This is written of men of
European origin, but I am not aware that such things
are less to be apprehended amongst depraved men of
other races.

4. On the point of Hard Labour the tenor of the
   correspondence goes strongly to confirm the opinion
   expressed in the Digest, and constantly reiterated by
   my predecessors and myself, that it is a mistake to
   sacrifice such efficacy of punishment as can only be
   obtained by penal labour-that is, labour by tread-
   wheel, crank, or shot drill-to any consideration of
   the immediate profit to be derived from the industrial
   labour of prisoners. The reports from the Governors
   of those Colonies in which penal labour (as above
   defined) has been introduced are uniformly in its
   favour. For instance, a Board composed of the chief
   public officers in Sierra Leone, in a letter of the 27th
   of September, 1869 (Parl. Paper, 1870, page 37),
   reported very strongly as to the deterrent effect of
   even a short term of labour on the treadwheel. The
   Administrator of St. Lucia, in his blue book report for
   1868 mentions that in the first year after the introduc-
   tion to a limited extent, of shot drill, the committals fell
   off from 592 to 291. In the Colony of Ceylon (where
   the reform of prison discipline has been carried
   through with conspicuous ability and zeal by a Com-
   mission comprising the Chief Justice and other
   highly qualified public officers) the effect of shot
   drill and hard fare was reported, as far back as June,
   1868, to be that a sensible diminution had taken place
   in the number of habitual criminals; that the fear of
   shot drill and penal diet was deterring the ill-disposed
   generally from crime; and that the Judges had
   felt themselves justified in greatly diminishing the
   scale of their sentences (Parl. Paper, 1870, page 56).
   In Antigua the effect of an increased severity of
   discipline (which does not appear to have included
   the general adoption of shot drill) was to reduce the
   committals from 822 in 1868 to 647 in 1869, about
   26 per cent.; and of this reduction of 175, the dimi-
   nution of recommitments amounted to 150 (Parl.
   Paper, 1870, page 21).

I need not enlarge upon the significance of these

objections to strictly penal labour sometimes proceed
upon the supposition that it is intended absolutely
to supplant industrial labour. This has never been
recommended by Her Majesty's Government, except
in the case of short sentences. And wherever the
labour of the prisoners can be utilized by means of
the crank or wheel without removing them beyond
the precincts of the gaol, those forms of penal labour
are obviously to be preferred to shot drill.

I have thought it desirable thus to draw your
especial attention to some of the questions raised in
the three sets of correspondence with the Governors
of Colonies on prison discipline which have been
successfully laid before Parliament since 1867, and
transmitted for your information; but the experience
obtained in the Colonies and represented in the cor-
respondence forms an important addition to that of
this country; and I recommend the study of it to
the Governors of Colonies and to others concerned
in the management of Colonial prisons. Attention to
the results of these extended inquiries will prevent
the undue over-ruling of generally approved principles
by mere individual opinion; at the same time, care
should be taken to note the instances in which further
experience, or local circumstances, point to a modifi-
cation of the existing system.

I request that you will furnish copies of this
Despatch to such public officers in the Colony under
your government as are connected with the adminis-
tration of prison discipline.

I have, &c.,
KIMBERLEY.

The Officer Administering
the Government of New Zealand.

Downing Street,
19th May 1871.

SIR, -With reference to the last paragraph of my
Despatch No. 38, of 8th April, I transmit to you an
Order of the Queen in Council, making provision and
Regulations for Appeals to Her Majesty in Council
from the Appellate Court in New Zealand.

I have, &c.,
KIMBERLEY.

Governor Sir G. F. Bowen, C.C.M.G.

AT THE COURT AT WINDSOR,
the 16th day of May, 1871.

Present:

THE QUEEN'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY.
HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS PRINCE ARTHUR.
LORD PRIVY SEAL. EARL COWPER.
EARL OF KIMBERLEY. LORD CHAMBERLAIN.
MR. SECRETARY CARDWELL. MR. AYRTON.

WHEREAS by an Ordinance passed by the General
Assembly of New Zealand in Parliament assembled,
in the twenty-fourth year of Her Majesty's Reign,
the Short Title whereof is "The Supreme Court Act,
1860," it was enacted amongst other things that the
Supreme Court of New Zealand should be a Court of
Record for the administration of justice throughout
the Colony, with the powers and jurisdiction therein
mentioned: And whereas by another Ordinance
passed by the said General Assembly in the twenty-
sixth year of Her Majesty's reign, the Short Title
whereof is "The Court of Appeal Act, 1862," it was
enacted, amongst other things, that there should be a
Court of Record in the said Colony, to be styled
"The Court of Appeal in New Zealand," with the
powers and jurisdiction therein also mentioned: And
whereas no appeal to Her Majesty in Council from
any judgment either of the said Supreme Court or of