What's in a Name?
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X4401700406 |
| Date | 01 October 1944 |
| Published date | 01 October 1944 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
What's
In
a
Name?
IT is inherent in English institutions to resist change, and in the
matter of nomenclature to retain names long after they cease plainly
to describe their object, After long
and
insistent efforts a real attempt
is now to be made to call courts of summaryjurisdiction by their modern
name,
"magistrates'
courts," to cure
the
public conception of
their
use as " police
courts"
and
to refrain from popularising the terms
"petty sessions " and " summary courts."
The
point is frequently and
correctly made
that
the
importance
and
volume of
the
work of magis-
trates' courts is far from
"petty,"
while
"summary"
implies a
brevity and expedition which can easily -be misunderstood by people
whose contact with the work of justices is rare
and
remote.
The
term
" police
courts"
naturally descends from the days when local govern-
ment and control of the police were largely in the hands of magistrates,
and from a-purely police point of view it is undesirable
that
the
word
" police " should be used to label any organisation or institution which
is
not
part
of a police force or
under
the control of its chief constable.
Many police, only remotely connected with the work of
the
Police Force,
in the capacity of specialists, take pride in adding
the
label "
police"
to their business or professional qualifications, and while there are no
statutory inhibitions on the subject it is desirable that, as a descriptive
adjective, "
police"
should be jealously watched
and
sparingly used.
In certain directions in recent years Parliament has seen fit to
alter the description of things
and
statutory definitions, in order to
avoid stigma for individuals
and
misconception or misunderstanding
in the minds of members of
the
public. Instances are to be seen in
legislation dealing with poor
and
mentally unsound persons. By the
Mental
Treatment
Act, 1930,
"asylum"
was changed to
"mental
hospital," "
pauper"
to " rate-aided person,"
and
"patient "replaced
the descriptions formerly legally and popularly called lunatics, boarders
and
the
like.
The
Mental
Treatment
Act prescribed
that
the
word
"
lunatic"
(except in
the
phrase "criminal
lunatic"
and
in relation
to persons detained as lunatics outside England)
"shall
cease to be
used,"
and"
person of unsound
mind,"
"patient " or similar expression
as the context may require.
Public opinion was ripe for these changes,
and
those engaged in
the
administration of public assistance
and
mental treatment would be
among the first to claim
that
these changes in nomenclature have been
invaluable in improving public sympathy
and
confidence in their work.
Similar statutory changes in terms
and
descriptions have been made
elsewhere. Only recently in the Education Act, 1944, the President of
283
To continue reading
Request your trial