First Clarke Hall Lecture " the Ethics of Penal Action."
| Date | 01 April 1934 |
| Published date | 01 April 1934 |
| DOI | 10.1177/026455053400101901 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
FIRST
CLARKE
HALL
LECTURE
" THE
ETHICS
OF
PENAL
ACTION."
THE
ARCHBISHOP
OF
YORK
STRESSES
THE
NEED
FOR
A
DEPARTMENT
OF
JUSTICE.
’ HE
Archbishop
of
York
delivered
the
first
Clarke
1L
’
Hall
Lecture
in
the
hall
of
Gray’s
Inn,
on
Monday,
igth
March,
before
a
distinguished
audience.
The Lord
Chancellor
(the
Rt.
Hon.
Viscount
Sankey),
presided,
and
in
introducing
the
Lecturer,
briefly
outlined
the
career
and
work
of Sir
William
Clarke
Hall.
Called
to
the
Bar,
both
in _
Ireland
and
in
England,
Sir
William,
in
due
course,
became
a
Master
of
the
Bench
of
Gray’s
Inn,
and
during
the
year
1926
held
the
office
of
Treasurer
of
that
Inn.
In
1913,
he
was
appointed
a
Metropolitan
magis-
trate
and
brought
with
him
to
this
work
a
mind
specially
equipped
by
experience
and
inclination
to
deal
with
young
offenders.
In
his
writings,
Clarke
Hall
had
told
us
that
for
such
a
task,
much
depended
upon
the
quality
and
the
temperament
of
the
presiding
au-
thority
of
the
Court,
and
that
a
judge
possessed
of
the
necessary
special
qualities
would
do
great
good
by
dealing
with each
offender
as
an
individual
and
not
merely
with
the
offences
that
had
been
committed.
Gittlenberg,
Ltd.
As
a
President
of
the
Juvenile
Courts,
he
had
seen
clearly
that
the
best
way
of
preventing
young
offenders
from
drifting
into
crime
lay
in
an
efficient
system
of
Probation.
His
whole
life
was
devoted
to
that
end.
Nobody
could
have
been
better
qualified
for
the
task
for
he
possessed
a
rare
knowledge
of
human
nature.
Summing
up
his
career
he
would
say
that
the
life
of
Clarke
Hall
was
a
landmark
in
the
history
of
the
treat-
ment
of
young
offenders.
The
man
had
gone,
but
his
work
and
example
remained,
and
he
would
be
remem-
bered
as
a
great
administrator
of
a
new
and
better
conception
of
one
branch
of
our
law.
The
Archbishop,
Dr.
Temple,
said
that
he
was
in-
truding
into
a
field
not
his
own,
but
he
would
speak
as
a
student ;
not
a
practitioner.
It
was
characteristic
of
the
English
genius
for
practical
affairs
that
they
were
suspicious
of
system
and
believed
rather
in
the
wisdom
of
dealing
with
each
situation
as
it
arose,
discovering
afterwards
on
what
principles
they
had
done
so
and
what
precedent
for
future
action
they
had
established.
That
there
was
a
kind
of
wisdom
in
this
was
undoubted.
But,
while
our
unmethodical
pro-
cedure
had
its
advantages,
it
also
led
in
course
of
time
to
a
state
of
confusion
more
perilous
than
the
perhaps
premature
systematisation
preferred
by
our
neighbours.
He
believed that
such
a
stage
had
been
reached
in
the
treatment
of
crime
in
England.
There
was
a
recognition
that
various
principles
were
in-
volved,
but
there
was
no
accepted
co-ordination
of
those
principles,
nor
was
there
any
person
or
Department
of
State
whose
business
it
was
to
effect
such
co-ordination.
Most
civi-
lized
countries
now
had
a
Ministry
of
Justice-a
Department
of
State
concentrating
its
attention
upon
the
questions
concerned
with
the
trial
and
treatment
of
the
offender.
Thus
co-ordination
was
made
possible.
In
England,
the
judges
and
magistrates
were
appointed
by
the
Lord
Chancellor,
while
recorders
and
stipendiary
magistrates
were
appointed
by
the
Home
Secretary.
Each
of
these
high
officials
had
a
multitude
of
other
responsibilities,
and
the
two
might
act
by
different
and
even
divergent
principles.
By
good
will
and
good
sense
we
made
this
arrangement
work
reasonably
well.
But
at
the
best
it
was
precarious,
and
it
excluded
To continue reading
Request your trial