The Project Gutenberg EBook of Report of the Juvenile Delinquency Committee, by
Ronald Macmillan Algie
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
Title: Report of the Juvenile Delinquency Committee
Author: Ronald Macmillan Algie
Release Date: October 13, 2008 [EBook #26912]
Language: English
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK JUVENILE DELIQUENCY COMMITTEE ***
Produced by Jonathan Ah Kit, Mark C. Orton, Victoria
University of Wellington College of Education (Gender and
Women's Studies Programme) and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
I--15
1955
NEW ZEALAND
REPORT
OF
JUVENILE DELINQUENCY COMMITTEE
(Hon. R. M. Algie, Chairman)
_Laid on the Table of the House of Representatives_
BY AUTHORITY:
R. E. OWEN, GOVERNMENT PRINTER, WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND.--1955
REPORT
By a resolution of the House dated the 28th day of September 1954 a
Special Select Committee was appointed to consider and to report upon
certain matters relating to moral delinquency. In particular, the
Committee was instructed to study the recommendations contained in the
report of the Mazengarb Committee and to make such observations thereon
as it thought fit. This Special Select Committee was empowered to sit
during recess and was directed to report its findings to the House
within twenty-eight days after the commencement of the next ensuing
session of Parliament.
The Orders of Reference relating to the Committee were as follows:
ORDERS OF REFERENCE
_Extracts from the Journals of the House of Representatives_
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 1954
_Ordered_, "That a Select Committee be appointed, consisting of ten
Members, to consider the Report of the Special Committee on Moral
Delinquency in Children and Adolescents (H-47, 1954); the Committee
to make such recommendations or observations as it thinks fit to
the House or the Government; the Committee to have power to sit
during the recess and for twenty-eight days after the commencement
of the next ensuing session; the Committee to consist of six
Members to be nominated by the Prime Minister and four Members to
be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition, such names to be
submitted to the Clerk of the House on or before 31 December 1954.
(Right Hon. Mr HOLLAND.)"
The names submitted in accordance with the above Order of Reference
were: Mr Aderman, the Hon. Mr Algie, Mr Barnes, the Hon. Mr Hanan,
Mrs McMillan, the Hon. Mr Mason, Mr D. M. Rae, the Hon. Mrs Ross,
Mr Skoglund, and the Hon. Mr Tirikatene.
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF APRIL 1955
_Ordered_, "That the period set down by Order of the House dated 28
September 1954 within which the Juvenile Delinquency Committee was
required to present its report be extended to 1 September 1955."
(Hon. Mr ALGIE.)
WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 1955
_Ordered_, "That the period set down by Order of the House dated 20
April 1955 within which the Juvenile Delinquency Committee was
required to present its report be extended to 1 October 1955."
(Hon. Mr ALGIE.)
The Committee met on two days during the recess and on a number of
occasions during the 1955 session.
For many reasons which need not be set out in this report, but which
were communicated to Parliament, it was found impossible to present a
report within the limits of time allowed, and by resolution of the
House it was finally agreed that the report should be presented on or
before the 1st day of October 1955.
We have given careful attention to each and every one of the
recommendations of the Mazengarb Committee. We have not felt it to be
our duty to hear over again all or any of the evidence placed before
that Committee, nor have we regarded it as our duty to deal broadly
with the incidence and causes of moral delinquency, or with the
discovery and presentation of remedies for this social malady. On the
contrary, we felt that we were required:
(1) To study the legislation relating to this subject and enacted
by Parliament in 1954, to consider its efficacy, and, if possible,
to make recommendations for its improvement, and
(2) To consider the suggestions made by the Mazengarb Committee for
action by particular Government Departments, to give an opinion as
to how far such recommendations could be given practical effect,
and to set out for the information of Parliament the extent to
which those recommendations had been put into operation.
Our views, suggestions, and recommendations are as follows:
The Need for Continuous Expert Investigation
In the course of our study of this problem it was frequently pointed
out to us that there was a real need for a thorough and continuous
study of this problem by those who from their training, experience, and
occupation were best qualified to advise as to the scope and extent of
the problem, as to its general causes, and as to the practical ways of
dealing with it. From information in the possession of the police and
of the Department of Justice it appeared that the extent of the evil
was in fact not so alarming as one might be induced to believe by a
perusal of the reports in the newspapers; there was, however, plenty of
evidence to suggest that misconduct amongst adolescents was increasing
and that this aspect of the matter was one for grave concern. There was
support for these views in written memoranda submitted by two of our
Magistrates, Mr Sinclair and Mr M. C. Astley. The Secretary for Justice
and Controller-General of Prisons, Mr S. T. Barnett, wrote as follows:
"My suggestion is that, as a first step, the Ministers in charge of
social Departments, e.g., Education, Child Welfare, Justice,
Police, should be requested to direct their Permanent Heads to
concert together and get down to a group study of the problem and
report to Government on the practical measures to meet it.
"Within these Departments are experts who can get down to the facts
and who ought to be able to propound some suggestions to ameliorate
the present unsatisfactory state of affairs. They should, of
course, be authorized, and indeed requested, to enlarge the
departmental group and to take in representatives of principal
welfare organizations."
The suggestions made by Mr Barnett were adopted, and the work
recommended by him is being carried on. The results have not yet
been made available to us.
We think that in matters of this kind fact finding carried out by
experts in a thoroughly scientific manner is fundamental, and in a
later portion of this report we have a specific recommendation to
make on this subject.
Specific Recommendations of Mazengarb Committee Relative
to Child Welfare Administration
In paragraph (4) of the report of the Mazengarb Committee--pages
57 to 60 inclusive--there are a number of comments and suggestions
relating to the Child Welfare Act and its administration. We have
examined these paragraphs very carefully, and we set out below some
excerpts from the report furnished to us by the Director of Education.
Our views are given immediately following the extract from the
opinion expressed by Dr Beeby, which is as follows:
"We have always felt that the spirit of the Child Welfare Act 1925
placed an obligation on us to do preventive work, and there are two
Cabinet decisions, one going back to 1941, which certainly give the
authority. However, we agree that it might be desirable to have the
obligation expressed explicitly in the Act. Indeed, in the draft
Child Welfare Bill prepared by the Division some eighteen months
ago you will find this done in two ways:
"(1) On page 43 of the draft Bill I sent you you will find Part
I devoted to preventive work, and clause 1 begins, 'It shall be
the _duty_ of the Superintendent to take positive action to
prevent children, etc.'.
"(2) On page 1 the definition of 'Child in need of care and
protection' is so widened as to cover every possible type of
preventive case, if read in conjunction with the amendments
passed during last session and with the Cabinet authorities to
spend public funds on such children.
"We do not think it necessary to increase the powers of Child
Welfare Officers for these purposes. To give them more actual
powers over children who have not committed an offence would be to
risk justifiable public objection to interference with the liberty
of the subject and the rights of parents."
_Page 58, paragraph (b)_
In its report the Mazengarb Committee said that the establishment
a few years ago of a Ministry of Social Welfare, and the urgent need
for more preventive work to be done, suggest the possibility of better
administration if "child welfare" were given an independent status
under the Ministry for Social Welfare.
This suggestion was examined by the Director of Education and by
the Superintendent of the Child Welfare Division of the Department
of Education. They reported fully to us, and their views are set out
below in summarized form.
The strongest arguments that were placed before us in support of
the view that child welfare should be a separate and independent
Department were to the following effect:
(1) The Superintendent would--as the head of his own Department--be
the captain of his own ship subject only to the direction of his
own Minister.
(2) The Director of Education has a huge Department of his own to
administer, and he cannot be expected to give to child welfare the
full measure of attention it should have.
(3) The Minister of Education must in the main find his principal
and absorbing interest in the school system, and he could hardly
devote to child welfare the same degree of attention that could be
expected from the Minister of Social Welfare.
(4) There would be times when the Superintendent must find it
burdensome to have to work through a Department with far-reaching
special interests of its own.
(5) The public standing and prestige of the Superintendent of Child
Welfare would be enhanced if he were recognized as the head of his
own independent Department.
The arguments on the other side may be summarized in the following way:
(1) Child welfare by itself would make a relatively small
Department and as such it might tend to become inbred and to
stagnate.
(2) A separate Department of Child Welfare would cost more than at
present because it would not be able to rely upon some of the
staffing and administrative facilities of the Department of
Education.
(3) Some of the institutions now conducted or controlled by child
welfare are really schools and as such they would always need to be
under the real control of the Department of Education.
(4) In actual practice no one could define with precision where the
functions of child welfare could be separated from those of
education.
(5) Over the years child welfare and education have worked out
their own joint policy of administration. They have in fact worked
along in harmony and with effective co-operation, and there
appeared to be no sound reason for disturbing a set-up which was in
fact efficient, economical, and harmonious.
We were completely satisfied that the present arrangement has the full
support of the Director of Education and the Superintendent of Child
Welfare. This view has also the support of the Public Service
Commission. After a study of the evidence that was placed before us we
came to the unanimous conclusion that matters should be left as they
are.
If it was decided by Government that child welfare should remain linked
with the Department of Education it would be advisable that some form
of administrative procedure should be worked out to define the
relations between the Director of Education and the Superintendent of
Child Welfare in so far as their respective approaches to the Minister
of Education and the Minister of Social Welfare are concerned. It was
clear to us that the present set-up is both efficient and harmonious. A
detailed plan for the due performance of the various duties was worked
out and agreed to by all interested parties. As it is a purely
administrative matter, we have not felt that it was necessary to embody
it in this report. Suffice it to say that in our opinion child welfare
should remain a part of the Department of Education, that its
Superintendent should have a right of direct reference to the Minister
of Social Welfare, that the Minister of Social Welfare should be
directly responsible for the administration of the vote applicable to
the Child Welfare Division, and that the administrative plan placed
before us should be adopted and applied unless and until varied by
agreement between the Ministers concerned.
_Page 59, paragraph (c)_
Dr Beeby said:
"It is true that no regulations have ever been gazetted prescribing
the duties of Child Welfare Officers. The provisions for them under
the Act are merely permissive, and we think it would be a
retrograde step to gazette any. The duties of the Superintendent
are adequately defined in the Act, and, as in other parts of the
Public Service, he delegates such of those powers as he thinks fit
to his subordinates. The Division's work has been done on this
basis since the passing of the Act, and we can recall no incident
where the absence of regulations has caused any difficulty. To
define the powers might well be to restrict them and to interfere
with the very preventive work we all desire.
"There should, as the Committee suggests, be some mention of
Honorary Child Welfare Officers in the Act, but their powers,
again, are better given by delegation than by legislation. It is
very desirable that the extent to which use is made of an Honorary
Officer's services be allowed to vary with the requirements of the
district and the ability of the officer."
We agree with the views expressed above by Dr Beeby.
_Page 59, paragraph (d)_
The Mazengarb Committee pointed out that the practice and procedure of
the Children's Court may tend to vary from place to place throughout
the Dominion because the Court was not presided over by its own
specially appointed Magistrate.
On this point the Director of Education said:
"This comment is true. The position has arisen because of the
practical difficulties of having the work carried out by specially
appointed Magistrates. The volume of work involved could justify
the appointment of only a few such Magistrates, and, because of the
geographical spread of the work, they could not handle it
expeditiously."
On this point we have no recommendations to make. We feel that the best
possible results are being secured by the Magistrates having regard to
their numbers and to the conditions under which they work.
_Page 59, paragraph (e)_
The Mazengarb Committee felt that it was a pity that proceedings in the
Children's Court were not conducted in a separate and distinct building.
It should at least be possible, said the report, to hear and determine
the cases in a room other than the ordinary Court room of a Magistrate's
Court. This was rather in the nature of a counsel of perfection. In
less-densely populated districts it would not be easy or economic to
provide separate accommodation of the kind envisaged. In larger and
busier centres it was often necessary to study the convenience of the
Magistrates themselves. The present Committee has no specific
recommendation to make in this connection.
The best that can be done is in fact being done.
_Page 60, paragraph (f)_
On the subject of the publicity to be given to proceedings in the
Children's Court the Mazengarb Committee said:
"There may be reasons why a Children's Court should be open to the
public ... The public has a right to know how child offenders have
been dealt with. The Committee does not recommend any alteration in
the provision prohibiting the publication of the name of any child,
or of any name or particulars likely to lead to identification.
Subject to this, it is desirable that reporters should be allowed
to attend."
With these views we find ourselves to be in complete agreement.
_Page 60, paragraph (g)_
The Mazengarb Committee appeared to hold the view that when children
have been placed under supervision there was no adequate "follow up"
procedure.
The following is Dr Beeby's comment upon this paragraph:
"It is a little difficult to see just what the Committee are
suggesting in this paragraph. If they are proposing that a Child
Welfare Officer be required to report progress to a Magistrate for
his personal information and to enable him to check on the
correctness of his judgment, there can be no possible objection.
When asked for, indeed, this is already done. If, on the other
hand, it is proposed that the Magistrate have continuing authority
over the child, then it would turn the Court into a social work
agency and would run counter to the whole trend in the development
of Children's Court and child welfare work from the beginning of
this century. The Magistrate would be compelled to take on
responsibilities for which he is not trained, and Child Welfare
Officers would tend to become merely junior probation officers
attached to the Court. One of the advantages of the present system
is that the Superintendent, being the final authority, can ensure
uniform standards of case work throughout New Zealand. If it were
left to each individual Magistrate to decide exactly what should be
done with children, it is certain that wide variations in
principles and procedures would occur. Experience has shown, for
example, that some Magistrates, with no first-hand knowledge of our
institutions, would send to them children for whom they are not
established to cater.
"With regard to the Committee's suggestion that there 'should be
some person or body apart from the departmental officers to whom a
child could turn for help ...', we would agree that something like
the Visiting Justice system of the Justice Department might apply
to our institutions as a guarantee to the public and as a
protection to both children and officers. However, to extend such a
system to children boarded out in private homes would be to ask for
endless trouble. People would be loath to accept State wards into
their homes if it laid them open to official visits from laymen
whose sole function was to hear complaints from the children. The
visits of Child Welfare Officers and of Inspectors of the Division
must, we feel, be accepted as the main guarantee to the public of
fair treatment."
Without expressing any decided opinion, the Committee felt that
what the Director of Education has to say is worthy of consideration
by Government.
Certain Specific Changes Proposed by the Mazengarb Committee
In clause (5) on pages 60 to 63, both inclusive, of the report the
Mazengarb Committee recommended that certain specific changes be
made as soon as possible in the legislation relating to proceedings in
the Children's Court. It was our duty to examine and report upon
each of these suggestions. Our comments are as follow:
_Paragraph (a), page 61_ (creation of a new offence) and _paragraph
(b), page 61_ (the compulsory attendance of parents at a Children's
Court)
Both of these recommendations have been given effect to, and they
are provided for in the legislation enacted late in the session of 1954.
_Paragraph (c). page 61_ (power of Court to make orders against the
parents of offending or delinquent children)
We agree with this recommendation, and we understand that the necessary
provision has already been written into a new Child Welfare Bill which
is in course of preparation.
_Paragraph (d), page 62_ (notification of fact of expulsion of a
child from school)
This proposal has already been given effect to by administrative
direction. We feel that legislation on this point will not be
necessary.
_Paragraph (e), page 63_ (notification to be given to principal of
a school where child found to be delinquent)
In normal practice the Child Welfare Officer does take a head teacher
into his confidence when placing a child in his school district and
actively seeks his co-operation. There are odd cases, however, where it
may be thought that an individual head teacher should not be given, in
the words of the report, all "the circumstances which led to the
delinquency". This would be a very rare occurrence, but the statutory
obligation to tell everything he knew on every occasion might prevent
the Child Welfare Officer's taking steps he believed to be in the best
interests of all concerned. The best results, we feel, will come from
wise administrative action and from a general improvement in the mutual
understanding between teachers and Child Welfare Officers.
The Committee felt that when information of this nature was passed on
to a Headmaster it should be treated as confidential. We feel strongly
that any child should always have a full opportunity of repentance and
of re-establishing his character, and where a child showed that
definite improvement had been made by him his chances of rehabilitation
should not be prejudiced by the fact of his earlier breach.
_Paragraph (f), page 63_ (recommendation that Child Welfare Act be
completely redrafted, etc.)
A complete redraft of the Act is now in course of preparation.
Further comments on paragraph (_f_) above were made by Dr Beeby. They
are as follow:
"We think that the right of appeal from the decisions of the
Children's Courts might be usefully made explicit in the Child
Welfare Act. We agree also that it might be well to provide for the
right of appeal against the Superintendent in certain
circumstances. If the system is to be workable and not brought to a
standstill by a mass of frivolous appeals, it will be necessary to
restrict the right of appeal. If an appeal were to lie every time
the Superintendent shifted a ward of State, the proceedings would
be endless. The only appeal, we think, should be one to have a
child discharged from the care of the Superintendent. Serious
complaints of ill treatment could be aired in this way. We are not
able to suggest, off-hand, exactly what the restrictions should be,
and very full discussions between Child Welfare authorities and
legal authorities would be necessary as a preliminary to effective
legislation on the point."
Little, if anything, appeared in the Mazengarb Committee's report to
justify us in thinking that a right of appeal of the kind suggested
should be provided. The Committee express the hope that a step of this
kind should not be taken unless sound reasons were advanced for taking
it.
Summary of Proposals for Administrative Action
In its report at pages 67 and 68 the Mazengarb Committee set out a
number of proposals which in its view could be met by appropriate
action on the part of the Departments mentioned by the Committee. The
suggestions made have been considered by the Departments, and we give
below a statement of the extent to which the suggestions have been
carried into effect.
(_a_) Police Department
It was suggested that the training of policewomen should be considered
with a view to deciding the best method of dealing with girls involved
in sexual offences.
For the information of Parliament we set out below a few excerpts from
a report prepared in the Police Department and sent to us by the
Minister of Police. The excerpts are to the following effect:
"A. _Selection and Training_
"The minimum educational qualities required are secondary school
(Form 2).
"Policewomen are not required for clerical or administrative
duties, therefore importance is not attached to ability to perform
office work, typing, or shorthand writing.
"Recruits chosen with due regard to the foregoing are required to
undergo a course extending over five weeks in the Police School at
Lyttelton. They are coached in subjects relating to statutes,
general police duties, powers and responsibilities of the police,
methods of dealing with various contingencies with which they may
be faced when on duty, relations with and bearing towards the
general public, first-aid, and self-defence. In short, this course
is similar in character to that undergone by male recruits to the
Force.
"Women recruits are instructed by a pathologist in matters
pertaining to pregnancy, abortion, and the identification of
abortion instruments and drugs. They receive instruction in
maternity hospitals, with special reference to the unmarried
mother. Children's homes, orphanages, and also homes for the aged
are visited and studied with a view to creating a solid background
for the policewomen's work.
"With the co-operation of the Justice Department women trainees
visit prisons and borstal institutions. They also attend and study
procedure at Magistrates' and Supreme Courts. The workings of the
probation service and Child Welfare Department are also the subject
of visits and study.
"The training course of five weeks is shorter than that for men,
but women recruits appear to absorb instruction more quickly and
less time is devoted to physical training.
"B. _Suggestions Relative to Training_
"It is felt the present training syllabus coupled with the
practical experience which rapidly follows is adequate and that
each policewoman is capable of dealing with the problem of the girl
who has been involved in sexual offences.
"C. _Further Comments_
"The Police Department appreciates that if increased numerically
and used more generally policewomen may be a great factor in the
prevention of juvenile delinquency, provided that through their
frequent association with children, both in the company of their
parents and at all grades of school, they become accepted by these
young persons from infancy. The help and guidance of women police
could be sought on grounds similar to those of the school dental
nurse who in her particular sphere is banishing the fear of dental
treatment. It is felt a similar approach to the child's moral
welfare is worthy of consideration."
It is a fact that within recent weeks steps have been taken by the
Government to establish and operate an improved system of training for
recruits for the Police Force. We had no information before us as to
the nature of the course or the length of the training period: nor do
we know whether a specific course of training will be prescribed for
women recruits. We feel, however, that it is a fair assumption that a
sounder, more thorough, and more systematic system is about to be put
into operation. We feel, too, that with the increased emphasis about to
be laid upon training, it can safely be taken for granted that every
effort has been, and will continue to be, made to give effect to the
suggestions of the Mazengarb Committee.
(_b_) Department of Internal Affairs
It was a recommendation of the Mazengarb Committee that steps should be
taken to gazette the outstanding regulations authorized under the
relevant film censorship Acts of 1934 and 1953.
A report received from the Department of Internal Affairs contains the
information set out below:
"It could be assumed from the terms of the recommendation that no
regulations are at present in force governing the censorship of
films and film posters. This, however, is not the case, as
appropriate regulations have been in operation for many years. What
is now contemplated is a revision of the existing regulations to
take account of later legislation and to modernise them in the
light of new developments and policies relating to this aspect of
the film industry.
"In particular, the Cinematograph Films Amendment Act 1953 made
fairly extensive amendments to existing law relating to censorship,
and this in turn has led to the necessity for a completely new
approach to certain policy and machinery aspects of the existing
regulations. For these reasons, and as the film industry is a
licensed and controlled industry, the Committee will understand
that it has not been possible, or even perhaps desirable, to
progress as speedily as would be the case with other regulations
of a more normal character.
"For the information of your Committee the general position now is
that the regulations are in a final stage of preparation and will
be submitted for Government approval as soon as practicable."
We have been advised that quite recently a final draft of the
regulations was forwarded to the Film Industry Board for consideration.
We were told, too, that conferences are being held between officers of
the Department of Internal Affairs on the one hand and members of the
Film Industry Board on the other. It is expected that at the conclusion
of such conferences an agreed draft will be sent forward to the
Government.
(_c_) Broadcasting Service
Two recommendations were before us for our consideration:
(1) "That the Service ensure that the concept 'Crime must never
pay' is more prominently featured in crime serials; and
(2) "That a married woman be immediately appointed to the
auditioning panel."
In its report to us the Broadcasting Service says:
"As regards (1), the Service has always attached great importance
to this principle. We can let feature producers know that we attach
greater importance to it than ever; but we cannot make it more
explicit or more prominent in a feature than the producers have.
(After all, no convention in the field of dramatic fiction, in any
medium, is stronger or better understood than the convention which
distinguishes hero and villain and makes the first triumph over the
second.)
"As regards (2), this extends a practice in accordance with which,
since 1952, one or another of the senior women officers of the
Service has been used as a referee, when auditioning officers have
been in doubt about the proper classification and placement of
features.
"It may be said in summary, then, that the principles, methods, and
practice of the Service are in general commended; that they are in
no respect criticized severely and in no respect without express
qualification; and that the Committee suggests or recommends no new
purpose, no new method, but only the closer application of methods
already well tried to a purpose which events have made weightier
and more urgent.
"Nevertheless, it has appeared to be desirable to consider what
action could and should be taken in accordance with what appears to
be the spirit of the Committee's comments and recommendations on
Broadcasting rather than with their letter. This has been done, and
in what follows I wish to offer some comments and explanations, to
review action taken as soon as the report was available and later
decisions now being carried out, and to ask for further direction."
"_Action: Immediate and Continuing:_
"(i) After the report had been studied Station Managers and
other responsible officers were asked to take interim action to
ensure that the spirit of the Committee's conclusions in regard
to a certain type of song was reflected in their programmes.
They were also asked to let us know, with reasons, of any
serial features running at their stations which they think
should be considered for withdrawal or later time placement.
"(ii) Two married women of senior status on our staff have been
selected to sit in alternation on the Standard Recordings
Purchasing Committee and the Features Purchasing Committee.
They will not be able to hear with every auditioning officer
all episodes of features or all single recordings of songs. To
duplicate auditioning staff for this purpose would require the
full-time service of five or six married women. Either one,
however, will with the Committee study reports, agreeing to
acceptance or rejection, and help to guide auditioning and
purchasing policy. Doubtful cases brought up by auditioning
officers will be heard by them as well as by other senior
officers.
"(iii) The time allotted to features classified as suitable for
playing when large audiences of children may be expected to be
listening has been from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m.; it is now to be from
4 p.m. to 8 p.m. There may be differences of opinion from time
to time on suitability of features for this classification as
we have a considerable number of public judges of our
decisions, but we shall do our best. All auditioning officers
will be fully alert to their responsibility.
"(iv) Opportunity was taken at a conference in Wellington at
the end of last month of the senior programme organizers of all
stations throughout the country to discuss fully their
responsibilities towards the matters raised in the Committee's
report. They also discussed the draft of a revised code of
instructions to auditioning officers and others, and this code
is now being circulated.
"(v) An extension of present procedure on popular song records
was decided upon for Head Office auditioning officers. Records
will be wholly rejected, or passed for general use, or passed
with the reservation that they are to be programmed with
special care (i.e., as to time placement, frequency, etc.)."
"The following further action is to be taken:
"(i) The issue of the code referred to above will give effect
to the Service's desire for the consistent wholesomeness of
programmes, the need to aim constantly to maintain standards in
programmes of all kinds at the highest appropriate level, and
the need to exercise discretion in programming material which
might be rendered objectionable by repetition, inappropriate
time placement, or standard and style of performance.
"(ii) Some of the dramatic features at present running will be
reauditioned if it is thought that they may be out of tune with
the present atmosphere or the revised time classification. Even
with additional assistance this task may take about six months.
There may be some financial loss if many episodes are to be
discarded or if the withdrawal of episodes or alteration of
time classification creates difficulties in providing
replacement programmes at short notice for sponsors. It is
relevant here to note the difference between ourselves and film
or book censors. After censoring we must ourselves face the
financial result of our actions and the administrative
difficulty of finding substitute and less objectionable
material.
"(iii) Suppliers of transcribed programmes in Australia are to
be advised of the implications of the report so far as it is
likely to affect our future purchasing policy.
"There has been a tendency amongst our critics (I do not refer
here to the Committee) to make insufficient allowance for the
considerable part played by broadcasting in serving the public
good in the spheres of information, education, the arts,
and community services. As Sir William Haley, formerly
Director-General of the B.B.C. and now Editor of the _Times_
said in a recent lecture on _The Public Influence of
Broadcasting and the Press_: 'It is, of course, possible to
counter all this by raising one's eyebrows at some of the
variety programmes. They are the other side of the medal. But
one must look at the whole'."
Our conclusions as a Committee are as follows:
(1) The officers of the New Zealand Broadcasting Service have
studied in a properly co-operative spirit the suggestions and
recommendations of the Mazengarb Committee, and that
(2) They are alive to the responsibilities that rest upon them as a
Department of State charged with the task of operating a most
important medium of public entertainment, information and
instruction, and that
(3) They have, over the years, worked out for themselves a code of
procedure under which a high and commendable standard of
broadcasting has been, and is being, maintained, and that
(4) They are taking all reasonable and practicable steps to give
effect to the suggestions put forward by the Mazengarb Committee,
and that
(5) We express the hope that the utmost vigilance should be
exercised over the choice, content, and timing of
programmes--especially over those designed for the extended hours
set apart for juvenile listeners--and that every effort be made to
maintain the high standard that the Service has set for itself. We
recommend, too, that during the hours set apart for children there
should be a complete absence of features that can fairly be
regarded as being unsuitable for or injurious to young people.
(_d_) Censoring Authorities
On this point we cite a paragraph from a memorandum placed
before us by the Secretary for the Department of Internal Affairs. It
reads as follows:
"A further recommendation contained in the report is to the
following effect:
"'Any Departments concerned with censorship should maintain a
liaison to produce as far as possible a uniform interpretation
of public opinion and taste.'
"In the view of this Department the objective of the recommendation
is good and should be followed up by appropriate action. There are
several Departments concerned from different angles, and it would
seem that the recommendation could best be implemented by whichever
Department is charged with the general oversight of matters
relating to moral delinquency. It would then be merely a matter of
administrative action for that Department to call periodical
meetings of the appropriate officers concerned with censorship."
We, as a Committee, agree with the view expressed above, and
recommend it to the Government for consideration.
(_e_) Department of Education
(i) _Relative Functions of Public Health Nurses and Visiting
Teachers._--The duties of visiting teachers were laid down quite
specifically in an official circular in 1953. Senior officers of the
two Departments discussed the relative functions of public health
nurses and visiting teachers very fully soon after the publication of
the report. The two Departments and Education Boards have drawn the
attention of all visiting teachers and public health nurses to methods
of avoiding overlapping and of working in co-operation. In a number of
districts Child Care Committees, sponsored by Senior Inspectors of
Schools, have instituted central case registers. These have been a
great help in ensuring that visiting teachers and public health nurses
do not deal independently with the same child and family.
A residential course at Frederic Wallis House, Lower Hutt, has been
planned for visiting teachers and public health nurses in 1956.
(ii) and (iii) _Additional Visiting Teachers and Type of Officer to
Help in Post-Primary Schools_.--Approval has been given for four
additional visiting teachers--two in Auckland, one in Wellington, and
one in Christchurch. Discussions have been held with representative
post-primary-school principals on the kind of help they need with
problem children. Rather than have visiting teachers specially attached
to the post-primary service, the great majority of principals were
strongly in favour of extending the functions of the Education Boards'
visiting teachers to cover post-primary pupils, so that one individual
could follow the members of a family through their full school career.
Approval has therefore been given for this. As a further assistance to
both primary and post-primary schools, three additional school
psychologists have been appointed.
(iv) _Housing for Teachers._--The Department has been trying to
deal with this problem in two ways:
(_a_) By an extension of existing policy for the erection of
teachers' houses. All Education Boards were consulted as to where
the greatest need for additional houses lay, and, without
exception, they gave highest priority to rural areas and small
towns. The Government is giving consideration to an extension of
policy based on this advice. In 1954, 61 houses were built for
teachers; this year the number is expected to be 84.
(_b_) By the use of the "pool" housing scheme administered by
an Inter-departmental Pool Housing Committee. Under this scheme, a
proportion of all new State houses erected is set aside for letting
to State employees and teachers on transfer. The Department of
Education is represented on the Committee that makes the
allocations and represents the needs and interests of the teachers
and the schools. Most of the areas concerned are in housing
settlements.
(v) _Facilities for Recreation._--The use of school grounds and
buildings after school hours is entirely in the hands of boards and
local committees. The Department has no direct authority in the matter,
but does facilitate and encourage such use. Practice varies, but in
many schools very great use is made of school facilities for community
purposes. The work in this respect will be made more effective by the
decision taken at the beginning of 1955 to build halls in all new
post-primary and intermediate schools built to the new designs, to
re-introduce the £2 for £1 subsidy up to £4,000 for halls in primary
schools and to give a pound-for-pound subsidy up to £4,000 on gymnasia
in post-primary schools. Approval has just been given, on an
experimental basis, for a subsidy on a gymnasium and cafeteria in one
intermediate school in Auckland, with the express condition that it be
used "to provide recreational and cultural facilities for young people
who have left school".
The Committee recommends these opinions for the consideration of the
Government.
(_f_) Research Into Juvenile Delinquency
The Mazengarb Committee was of opinion that there should be a long-term
study of the problem of delinquency. As a matter of fact the present
Committee heard evidence on this suggestion from several witnesses, and
we were greatly impressed by what we heard. It goes without saying that
if one would seek a remedy for a given problem a thorough diagnosis of
the problem itself is a fundamental prerequisite. First let us find the
facts; let us know what is the nature and extent of the evil; let us
get as much data as to its causes and incidence. With that material in
hand we should be in a better position to search for useful methods of
treatment. This task of fact finding would be a long and arduous one;
it would need to be entrusted to experts of wide knowledge and
experience. A start has already been made by the setting up of the
Inter-Departmental Committee referred to earlier in this report. We
strongly recommend the Government to give very favourable consideration
to this particular proposal, and we hope that ways and means will be
found of giving effect to it. We think that this suggestion is of
fundamental importance in any approach to the problem, and we consider
it should be given consideration by the Government.
_Instruction for Parents_: In the long run the responsibility for
a child's general well-being rests upon the parents. Some can, and do,
take every care to discharge that responsibility. Others either fail or
neglect to do so. In some cases this failure comes from a lack of the
necessary knowledge or from inability to impart it. In one memorandum
addressed to the Committee there appear the following paragraphs:
"I think it highly probable that much delinquency is due to the
fact that parents simply do not know how to teach their children on
a subject that many parents regard as secret between parents. I
think it highly unlikely that a parent will consult an adviser
(say, a doctor) as to how the child should be trained, and I am not
so sure that a doctor would know what advice to tender even if he
was consulted.
"Instruction of parents seems to be the job of a specialist. The
doctors have prepared several booklets on sex instruction.
"I am wondering if good attendance could be secured for a series of
lectures by specialists to parents, either to both sexes or to
mothers alone. A mother would probably be more likely to attend a
meeting as one of an audience rather than to suffer the
embarrassment of a personal consultation with, say, a doctor to
whom she has to admit that she does not know how to discharge her
duty to her children.
"It is generally agreed that much of the cause of child delinquency
is due to unsatisfactory home influence and parental control and
example, but the fact that many of the offenders come from good
homes and fine parents is strong evidence, I feel, that there is
some important deficiency even in those good homes, and it may well
be that that deficiency lies in the fact that the parents do not
really know how to give their children the knowledge that they
should have in the way they should receive it. I am confident that
we have people who could help in this important work. Perhaps women
lecturers would be best."
We are of opinion that the views expressed above do merit very serious
consideration. We realize the tremendous difficulty we face in trying
to reach those who stand most in need of the help that is here referred
to. We recognize, however, that all our children must spend a big
portion of their young lives in our primary and post-primary schools.
It is here that positive and well-planned character training and
instruction in moral values can be undertaken with a certainty that the
instruction and the training will reach those whom we would wish to
help. Do we take full advantage of this opportunity? Do we give enough
attention to those inner disciplines that are so essential if a good
life is to be enjoyed by our young people? We are satisfied that our
teachers as a whole nobly discharge their obligations to our community
in this regard. We think, however, that the matters touched upon in
this paragraph are within the special province of the Department of
Education and its Minister, and it is our recommendation that they
should be referred to that Minister for examination and for such
positive action as he may consider proper and desirable.
We think also that much more could be done in the homes if the ranks of
our visiting teachers, public health nurses, and school psychologists
were strengthened considerably, and we strongly recommend that action
along these lines should be taken by the Departments of Education and
Health.
We are also of opinion that in any effort to reach parents over the
widest possible field a very useful agency lies ready to our hands in
our Parent-Teacher and Home and School Associations, and it is our hope
that this agency might be much more positively used to awaken and
maintain a due sense of parental responsibility and a proper
understanding of the moral and spiritual needs of children.
With such thoughts in mind, we would recommend that the Director of
Education be asked to confer with the appropriate experts to see how
far, and under what conditions, suitable courses of lectures could be
provided for parents and prospective parents.
The Special Legislation of the 1954 Session
Following upon the presentation of the Mazengarb report the Government
immediately took steps to give effect to those recommendations which
called for special legislation. Three Bills were introduced, the first
dealing with "indecent publications", the second dealing with child
welfare, and the third with police offences.
In our order of reference we were directed to study these pieces of
legislation and to report as to their efficacy and as to whether there
were any specific amendments that were necessary or desirable.
In the preparation of this part of our report we have had the advice
and much valued assistance of the Department of Justice. We deal here
with the question of "publications". Our comments as to the Child
Welfare Act appear elsewhere in this report. No comment is needed
regarding the amendment to the Police Offences Act. First as to
_publications of a more or less objectionable character circulating
in New Zealand_.
We set out at some length some portions of the report submitted for our
consideration by the Minister of Justice, the Hon. Mr Marshall.
_Inter alia_, it is said:
I. _Objectionable Publications in General_
"Our survey of the book trade disclosed that there were three types
of publication to which particular attention should be
given--comics, certain crime stories, and nudist and other
suggestive magazines.
(_a_) _Comics_: "These are the publications which have attracted
most public attention, both here and overseas, and in particular
the type of comic known as the 'crime' or 'horror' comic has come
in for a great deal of severe criticism. It is true that reading of
a mildly bloodthirsty nature directed at the juvenile market is no
new thing. The comic books of today, however, are not those of a
generation ago, nor are they at all similar to the comic strips now
appearing in the newspapers. Many of them are full of matter which
is brutal, horrifying, and sadistic, and although to a certain
extent they are published for and read by adults of feeble
mentality they are also available to children.
"The origin of this type of comic is the United States, but other
countries have not been slow to follow suit. Large numbers of
comics are reprinted in England and Australia from American plates.
The interim report of the Kefauver Committee strongly indicts crime
and horror comics and gives some revolting illustrations of their
contents. Reports indicate that comics almost as bad were
circulating in England before the introduction of legislation
there. The nature of crime comics circulating in Canada was
responsible for an Act passed there in 1949 prohibiting such
comics.
"Even before the passing of last year's Act none of the comics on
sale in New Zealand was as bad as the worst American or English
examples. At the same time some of them were most objectionable.
Since action has been taken here and in Australia the standard of
comics distributed in New Zealand appears to have improved
considerably. That is not to say that they are all free from
objection, and there are a number of crime comics which we do not
think should be allowed to go on circulating. Indeed, we think that
this country can well do without the crime comic altogether.
Recently objection was taken to some forty comics, and we are
waiting advice from the distributors as to their attitude. Later in
this report we shall refer to further proposals for dealing with
comics.
(_b_) _Crime Stories_: "The second class of publications referred
to comprises publications usually known as 'thrillers'. These books
are quite different from the ordinary detective novel and from the
more traditional type of thriller. Many examples of this new type
of gangster thriller have been flooding the New Zealand market in
the form of paper-backs selling at 2s. 6d. or less. They are
entirely devoid of literary or other merit and are devoted to the
wanton depiction in gross detail of brutality, violence, and sex.
"These publications and a number of so-called detective magazines
which imitate them may perhaps be regarded as the adolescent
equivalent of the crime comic, and we believe them to be equally
harmful. Action against them will, we think, no more infringe the
principle of freedom of speech than action against narcotics
infringes the principle of free enterprise in the economic sphere.
"Action against these publications was taken some time ago, and
some of the results of this action have appeared from recent
reports in the press. As an illustration of what has been done we
advised the Associated Booksellers that you considered all the
novels of Mickey Spillane to be indecent and that you were prepared
to prosecute in respect of them. The booksellers agreed with this
opinion and recommended their members not to stock these books. We
think it significant that these books, which were agreed to be
objectionable, were being sold by many reputable booksellers in New
Zealand. This shows how easy it is to offend unwittingly against
the Act.
"There was a group of even more objectionable publications
published in paper-back form by an English firm, Milestone Ltd. We
advised the police some time ago that we intended to take
proceedings against any one found selling these books. The
Booksellers' Association agreed with this view.
"There is an enormous output of books and paper-backs of the
detection-thriller type, and it is by no means easy to know where
to draw the line. It should be possible, however, to eliminate the
really harmful and leave the rest.
(_c_) _The Suggestive Magazine_: "The third class of publications
is the suggestive magazine. Some public concern has been expressed
that a number of suggestive magazines are continuing to circulate
in this country. The truth is, however, that, although the names
are the same, the contents are very different. We have carefully
examined all these magazines, and, although they are not perhaps
very edifying, we are satisfied that at present none of them
clearly infringes the law.
"Nudist magazines are another matter. Those we have seen appear
unobjectionable if their circulation is restricted to nudists and
persons interested in the nudist cult. They have, however, been
appearing in some newsagents' and tobacconists' shops and openly
displayed in windows, and we consider circulation in this form to
be undesirable. Serious consideration is being given to the
prosecution of any one who displays these magazines or sells them
to the general public."
II. _Suggested Amendments to the Law Relating to Indecent Publications._
The Justice Department has given much attention to the question as to
the efficacy of the amending Act introduced in 1954. We had the
advantage of reading the report presented by the Department to the
Minister of Justice, and we set out below certain portions of the
report which we as a Committee think worthy of notice. The report says,
_inter alia_:
"(1) We think that the substantive changes made in the special
legislation in 1954 have been beneficial, and we strongly recommend
that they be retained. The Indecent Publications Act 1910, as it
previously stood, dealt with sex and with sex alone, and this is
not sufficient. It is, for instance, doubtful if the Spillane
novels or some of the books in the Milestone series could
successfully be objected to merely on grounds of sex; but they are,
nevertheless, of an immoral and mischievous tendency and should not
be allowed to continue in circulation. They might be described as
'sadistic' in the true psychological sense in that they combine sex
and violence.
"There has been some suggestion that the Act leaves too vague just
what is indecent and that the word 'indecent' should be defined
with precision. In the nature of things there are, however, very
great difficulties in attempting such a definition. It is
significant that no precise definition of indecency exists either
in the principal Act or so far as we are aware in the legislation
of any other Commonwealth country.
"The present state of affairs might be dangerous if prosecutions
could be taken on the decision of police officials in any town in
New Zealand. Whatever may be said in theory, however, the fact that
prosecutions can be brought only with the leave of the
Attorney-General is, we think, a sufficient guarantee that the law
will be applied uniformly and reasonably. Moreover, there is a
further safeguard in the right of appeal to the Supreme Court
against all decisions of a Magistrate under the Act.
"We believe that the bookselling trade is quite happy with the
present substantive law as it is now being administered, and we
firmly hold the opinion that the best course is to leave the
substantive provisions of the 1954 Act largely as they are.
"(2) The registration provisions are a rather complex way of
achieving their object, which is to enable the Court to put a
seller out of business if he is convicted of an offence against the
Act and if the Court believes his conduct is such as to warrant
this penalty. We think that this object could be achieved by giving
the Court this power directly. It could be provided that on
convicting any one under the Act the Court may make an order
prohibiting him for a certain period from carrying on the business
of selling books or periodicals. The provisions as to registration
could then be repealed."
Some members of the present Committee felt that this power should be
exercised only in the case of a second or subsequent conviction.
"(3) The marking requirements of the Act are not well adapted to
their object, and, as we have mentioned, it has proved necessary to
a large extent to dispense with compliance with them. We think it
is anomalous that the law should continue to require marking while
almost every publication is exempted.
"In place of the present marking provisions we suggest that every
New Zealand publisher should continue to be required to print his
name and address on what he publishes, that the importer of
overseas periodicals for sale or distribution be required to supply
to the Department of Justice a list of the titles imported by him,
and that every one other than a retail bookseller who carries on
the business of importing books be required to supply to that
Department a list of the publishers whose books he imports.
"(4) There is one anomaly in section 5 (1) (_d_) of the principal
Act as set out in the 1954 Act. This is the provision which
requires the Magistrate to take account of the persons, classes, or
age groups to whom a document is sold or is intended or likely to
be sold _and the tendency of the document to deprave or corrupt
such persons_. The words in italics are appropriate in the
Victorian statute from which they were copied because the
common-law test of depraving or corrupting applies in Victoria, but
they are at best unnecessary in New Zealand where the Act lays down
its own test--namely, that the act of the defendant must be of an
'immoral or mischievous tendency'.
"(5) The 1954 Amendment contains some ambiguities and anomalies in
matters of detail which should be remedied when any further
legislation is brought down. These defects were discussed in an
article by Professor I. D. Campbell in the 1955 _New Zealand Law
Journal_, page 294.
"_New Provisions Suggested_: (1) As we have said, we are not
anxious that the ordinary law-abiding bookseller or distributor
should have to undergo the stigma of a criminal prosecution, and
this was the main reason for entering into arrangements with the
Associated Booksellers and Gordon and Gotch. At present, however,
criminal proceedings afford the only real way of testing the
position even where there is an honest difference of opinion. We
think a better procedure could be devised, and the Select Committee
may be invited to deal with this matter.
"(2) A number of comics which are not strictly indecent within the
meaning of the Act are nevertheless objectionable from other points
of view. In many the ethical standards of the characters are low.
The quality of the print and illustrations varies from the
indifferent to the very poor, and must have a serious effect on
children's eyesight. In a number of comics the grammar and
vocabulary are likewise bad.
"It is said that children learn from what they see and hear around
them. If this is so it would appear that the assiduous reading of
comics tends to counteract the work of teachers which costs the
country so much.
"An Inter-departmental Committee in 1952 recommended the
introduction of a system of registration. The Committee's original
recommendations were: that publishers or importers of comics should
apply for registration of every title and that only suitable titles
should be registered. The sale of unregistered comics was to be an
offence. This procedure may be preferable to the subsequently
suggested system of automatic registration followed by
de-registration upon complaint.
"Registration of comics, of course, amounts to censorship. There
is, however, no question of literary merit or the spread of
knowledge, and the view that an adult should in general be free to
read what he likes does not apply in the case of publications
primarily intended for children. If it is accepted as proper to
censor films there can be little objection to censoring comics.
"We therefore suggest that the Select Committee might consider
whether an authority might be set up to approve and register
comics. There could be an Appeal Board similar to that in respect
of films to consider complaints against any decision of the
registering authority.
"If this suggestion is unacceptable an alternative might be an
amendment to the legislation to be introduced enabling the Court in
the case of comics to take into account as one of the factors in
considering whether they are objectionable matters of grammar,
language and visual standards."
The present Committee is of opinion that there is a good deal of force
in the suggestions put forward in this part of the report of the
Department of Justice, and our view is that these suggestions should be
referred to the Minister of Education with a request that he consider
them favourably and forward his conclusions to the Government.
"(3) We have come across cases in which publications have been
advertised to such persons and in such a way as to endeavour to
sell them or attract the public on the basis of their emphasis or
alleged emphasis on sex, horror or violence.
"If a publication--for instance, a medical book--is displayed in a
shop window open at a page of illustrations this would probably be
an offence against the present law even though the book may itself
be unobjectionable. There is however, another type of case which
would not be caught by the law as it stands, but which we think
equally deserves to be prohibited. An example of what we have in
mind is an advertisement which is put out by a mail-order firm and
is obviously designed to 'sell the book on its sex.' This open
appeal to salacious instincts is most objectionable and we can see
no justification for allowing it. Whether or not the publication
itself is indecent, we think the type of advertisement we refer to
should be prohibited by law.
"_Amendments of Principal Act_: Prior to 1954 the Indecent
Publications Act 1910 had stood without alteration for over forty
years, and although its main principles are still sound revision is
badly needed. Indeed, last year's amendment in certain respects
increased rather than decreased the difficulties. In our opinion,
the best solution is to reconsider the legislation as a whole and
to deal with the topic of objectionable publications in a new and
self-contained Act. This would, of course, take some time. We have
notes of many points to raise with the draftsman, but we cite
others of more general significance.
"(1) We consider that parts of the present section 6 are obsolete
and should be repealed. Section 6 enumerates certain classes of
works which are _prima facie_ indecent. Among these are 'any
document or matter which relates or refers, or may reasonably be
supposed to relate or refer, to any disease affecting the
generative organs of either sex, or to any complaint or infirmity
arising from or relating to sexual intercourse, or to the
prevention or removal of irregularities in menstruation'.
"In so far as this part of the section would prevent the
advertising of useless or harmful products, it is unnecessary in
view of the Medical Advertisements Act 1942. In so far as it
represents a general attitude it seems out of date now that the
matters referred to are discussed with far less reticence than when
the Act was passed. The reference to drugs or methods for procuring
abortion or miscarriage in the later part of the section might be
retained, but it belongs more properly in the Crimes Act or the
Police Offences Act.
"(2) At present section 157 of the Crimes Act overlaps the
provisions of the Indecent Publications Act 1910, and the tests it
lays down are expressed in very different language. This section is
little used, but it seems undesirable that there should be two
different tests for what is really the same offence. We recommend
the repeal of section 157 in so far as its subject matter overlaps
the Indecent Publications Act 1910.
"(3) If the legislation is rewritten, we suggest that consideration
be given to the incorporation in the Act of the 'dominant effect'
test laid down in an American case, the Ulysses case.
"The consolidation and rewriting of the existing legislation would
be of real benefit. The nature of the topic, however, demands that
any general consolidation should receive careful and even cautious
consideration. We do not think that in this matter urgent or speedy
action is called for."
The Committee has examined all of these suggestions and recommends that
they should receive the very favourable consideration of the Government.
Summary of Principal Conclusions and Recommendations
I. That the changes in the law which were regarded by the Mazengarb
Committee as calling for immediate action were duly and promptly
brought into being by the Government by and through its 1954 amendments
to the Indecent Publications Act 1910, the Child Welfare Act 1925, and
the Police Offences Act 1927.
II. That the changes made last year in the Indecent Publications Act
1910 have been to some extent effective and helpful. We recommend,
however, that consideration be given by Government to the redrafting of
the Indecent Publications Act 1910 and to the inclusion in any new
draft of the amendments suggested by the Department of Justice.
III. That it is clear that the suggestions made by the Mazengarb
Committee for administrative action by certain named Government
Departments along the lines indicated by that Committee have
been sympathetically studied by the several Departments and that
satisfactory measures have been taken by such Departments to carry
out the recommendations of that Committee.
IV. That in the opinion of the present Committee the Child Welfare
Division should not be reconstituted as a separate and independent
Department of State, but that it should remain, as at present, a Branch
or Division of the Department of Education.
V. That Government should take effective steps to set up a broadly
based committee composed of men and/or women of expert knowledge and
possessed of specialized training and wide experience to act as a
fact-finding body so that as far as possible a reliable diagnosis may
be obtained of the extent, causes, and incidence of the problem of
delinquency in this Dominion. We think that this must be done before
any thorough-going solutions can be propounded for consideration by
Government.
VI. That the suggestions made by the Department of Justice with respect
to "comics" in general and "crime comics" in particular and also with
regard to "suggestive" magazines and periodicals appeal very strongly
to the members of the present Committee, and we accordingly recommend
that the Government should take action along the lines proposed by the
Justice Department.
VII. That every effort be made through the Parent-Teacher and Home and
School Associations to reach the greatest possible number of parents
and prospective parents in order that they might be given the type of
assistance referred to in greater detail in the body of this report.
VIII. That, for the better attainment of the object set out in the
preceding paragraph, it is recommended that the Director of Education
be asked to confer with appropriate experts with a view to the
provision of suitable courses of lectures for parents and prospective
parents.
That with the same end in view steps should be taken to increase the
numbers of our visiting teachers, school psychologists, and public
health nurses.
IX. That the Director of the National Broadcasting Service be supported
in the course he proposes to follow to put into effect the suggestions
made by him in this report. We also stress our view that during the
hours set apart for listening by children there should be a complete
absence of features that can fairly be regarded as being unsuitable for
or injurious to young children.
X. That on the question of contraceptives the Committee has but one
recommendation to make--namely, that the Government should seriously
consider whether it could be made a criminal offence for any one but a
chemist acting in the ordinary course of his business to sell such
articles to any member of the general public.
R. M. ALGIE, Chairman.
BY AUTHORITY:
R. E. OWEN, GOVERNMENT PRINTER WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND.--1955
_Price 1s. 6d._
End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Report of the Juvenile Delinquency
Committee, by Ronald Macmillan Algie
*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK JUVENILE DELIQUENCY COMMITTEE ***
***** This file should be named 26912-8.txt or 26912-8.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
https://www.gutenberg.org/2/6/9/1/26912/
Produced by Jonathan Ah Kit, Mark C. Orton, Victoria
University of Wellington College of Education (Gender and
Women's Studies Programme) and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
will be renamed.
Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you
do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is
subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
redistribution.
*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
https://gutenberg.org/license).
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an
individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning
the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked
to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
that
- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is
owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments
must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg-tm works.
- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
of receipt of the work.
- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the
Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with
the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists
because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
https://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at
809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
[email protected]. Email contact links and up to date contact
information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
page at https://pglaf.org
For additional contact information:
Dr. Gregory B. Newby
Chief Executive and Director
[email protected]
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To
SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
particular state visit https://pglaf.org
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily
keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
https://www.gutenberg.org
This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
