In the Committee Stage of this Bill Deputy Johnson raised a question as to the power given to impose a fine in addition to a sentence of imprisonment, and contended that in some way that provision militated, or might militate, against the poor man, against the man without money, and in favour of the person who had money and who, in that way, could, as it were, buy off a term of imprisonment. It is not contemplated that the provision could or would have any such effect. I take it that the judge or justice hearing a case, and deciding to make use of this permissive provision, would have regard to the circumstances of the accused person and to his ability to pay a fine in addition to a period of imprisonment.
In consultation with officials of my Department I have decided that there is really no case for a change in the provision as it stands. I consider that it is a useful power, that these cases vary very much in the degree of guilt and in all the attendant circumstances. You can have under this particular Act offences ranging from the merest technical breach in the law to offences of a very serious nature. Much would depend on the motive for which a person might be supposed to have improperly and illegally a lethal weapon without the knowledge or the consent of the proper authorities, and judging each case in that way in its perspective and in its attendant circumstances, it was thought wise to enable the magistrate to inflict a fine, in addition to a period of imprisonment, if he thought that the circumstances warranted it. I could understand the objection to this provision if it were mandatory, if it were a hard and fast or binding provision, but I must say that I cannot understand or appreciate the objections when it is purely a permissive section.
