The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

As a result of the Police Association advertisement, my recent questionnaire and letters to the editor in local papers, I have been receiving thousands of coupons and representaâ€" tions regarding the question of capital punishment. I have been trying to answer each one personally and as fully as I can to explain my position but unfortunately, the volume has surpassed the capabilities of my office to answer each person individually. It has become quite clear that I will not be able to answer all the representations and therefore, I would very much appreciate your publishing in your "Letters to the Editor®" column, the reply that I am sending out so that the public will be fully aware of my position and my reasons for taking that position. This is the letter I have been sending : Thank you for returning the questionnaire and for your representation on Capital Punishment. A major concern of Canadian citizens is to prevent and reduce crime in order to Letfer to the edifteor . protect our society. Unfortunately, the spate of horrible murders committed recently in Canada have led large segâ€" ments of the public to believe that violent crime is on a rapid and uncontrolled increase. It is further feared in some quarters that this increase is due in part to a decreased use of severe punitive measures against criminals. o Let us look at the facts. Existing data indicates that there has been no disproportionate increase in the number of vioâ€" lent crimes. The proportion of violent offences to all Crimina Code offences had in fact, remained relatively constant at around 10 per cent per annum over the period 1966â€"73. Furthermore, while the murder rate has increased moderâ€" ately in the period, the rate of increase has been less than that of other crimes of violence whose penalties have reâ€" mained substantially the same. Complete data is not yet available for 1974, but the information we do have indicates that the same trend has continued during the past years. There has been especially strong concern over crimes of violence when the victims have been law enforcement agents. This is understandable since police are the thin blue line protecting the public from danger. It is important to point out, though, that there has not been a significant inâ€" crease in the murder of policemen in this country since 1962. The police murder rate shows a fluctuation between 1961 and 1974, while the penitentiary employee murder rate shows a decrease during this period. Most murders (11 cases) occurred in 1962 when capital punishment was still in force. In 1963, there were no police murders. Between 1964 and 1973, the number of murders fluctuated between two to five and then rose in 1974 to six. There is obviously no trend of increasing police murder in the past decade or so, and it is too early to conclude that any such trend is beginâ€" ning. I believe that the recent tragic events have fostered a misâ€" conception as to the relative seriousness of crime in this country and have been responsible for the belief that capital punishment will help to solve it. The problem is serious, but I do not feel the proposed solution is likely to help. Capital punishment would help to satisfy the strong sense of moral and emotional outrage many of us experience when murder is committed. Also the threat posed by a particular individuâ€" al is undoubtedly terminated by this means. However, other crucial issues are involved. Before we had statistical evidence on the effectiveness of capital punishment, it was employed as a‘last resort to deâ€" fend society. Now however, available evidence shows that: capital punishment is not deterrent and my feeling is that we should be focusing on the causes of crime and the most efâ€" fective ways to deal with it. We now know that most violent crime are neither deliberâ€" ate nor rationally planned and that one or more of the followâ€" ing is usually present: quarrels or a history of quarrels beâ€" tween friends and family; situations where alcohol or drugs is present; situations where immediate access to firearms exist; situations where the eventual offender feels threatenâ€" ed by others present; and cases of mental or emotional deâ€" rangement. Given the sudden, unplanned nature of most homicide, it appears unlikely that most individuals who comâ€" mit murder take into account the factor of capital punishâ€" ment as a deterrent. I have examined all available evidence on the deterrent effect of capital punishment and the more I study the quesâ€" tion, the more I became convinced that capital punishment is not the solution to murder. Evidence, statistics and reâ€" search from Canada, United States and Europe indeed indicate that capital punishment does not effectively lower murder rate. As a matter of fact, the lowest murder rates are found in those countries and states, such as Sweden, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Rhode Island and Maine, where capiâ€" tal punishment has been abolished for a long time. On the other hand, some of the highest murder rates are found in France, Spain, Florida, South Carolina, Louisiana and Georgia where capital punishment has been in effect for a tong time. On the question of commutation of death sentence by the Federal Cabinet, it is sometimes thought that, because the trial judge has no option but to pass the sentence of death, execution must follow if the law is to be observed faithfully. Some think that because all five cases considered since Deâ€" cember,. 1967 (when the Criminal Code was amended to restrict the circumstances in which the death sentence apâ€" plies), were commuted, that there has been a miscarriage of justice. This is simply not so. The Criminal Code provides that the Governorâ€"inâ€"Council may commute a sentence of death. Indeed. the Criminal Code requires that the trial judge in fixing a date for execution, must set that date at a time far enough in the future so that the Governorâ€"inâ€"Council may first determine whether the sentence should be carried out Statistics published by the National Parole Service show ‘Therefore, 1 want to listen to as many opinions and the that between January 1920 and September 1974, a total of 182 argurpents to support those opinions as I can get. I want this persons, who had a death sentence commuted were granted particularly from my own constituents, but also from wellâ€" parole. Ounly 14 persons had their parole revoked as a result informed opinion wherever I can find it. I send out questionâ€" of not adhering to parole conditions, and only nine persons naires and read every one that is sent back to me. I read and forfeited parole for conviction of an indictable offence. study a great deal and maintain correspondence with many Between 1867 and 1975 only one person who had his death people across the country. If views are not offered, I search sentence commuted committed a second murder. He was them out because I do not want to decide until I have learnâ€" executed for this crime in 1944. We do not have complete ed as much as I can about a question. It is only then that I data for other murderers sentenced to life imprisonment by â€" take a position. the Com"ty ;n‘: indications are that the rate of recidivism is Considering the multitude of opinions and interests in our Some argue i;hat time served by individuals, who have had society, Enany of them in direct conflict .'m' each other, their death sentences commuted, is minimal and hears no there isn‘t any honest way I know of by 'l“d' I °°.“m please relation to the seriousness of their offence. The 28 individuâ€" mme' Niaturally, the persons whorse advice i‘ve .arlght a not followed has a logical question to put to me: *You als serving deathâ€"commuted sentences, who were paroled sked me for my opinion, 1 gave it to you; didn‘t take it; between January 1, 1961 and January 3, 1968 served an averâ€" :mat the Y ?:‘ the'wlgalee Y .,:.m + age of 12 years in a penitentiary prior to release. For the 42 was po'm exercls’e. . â€" persons serving deathâ€"commuted sentences, who were parolâ€" _ The explanation for me at any rate, is quite obvious. Your ed between January 4, 1968 and September 30, 1974, the averâ€" OPinions are important aids to understanding the situation age time served rose to 13.55 years. This does not cover those and to help form my views. Most of the time I find myself who have not been paroled. This average time served is, of Persuaded by the majority argument, not just because it is course, longer than that served from any other type of ofâ€" the majority but because the arguments you put forward are fence. We also have recent data on the Temporary Absence COnVincing. Sometimes I am persuaded by one letter or by Program in our penitentiaries. During 1974, 1,019 temporary One conversation if that person has said something that I chcanaa naormite wore jcened in same rarefully selected in _ hadn‘t taken into account. extremely low. Some argue that time served by individuals, who have had their death sentences commuted, is minimal and hears no relation to the seriousness of their offence. The 28 individuâ€" als serving deathâ€"commuted sentences, who were paroled between January 1, 1961 and January 3, 1968 served an averâ€" age of 12 years in a penitentiary prior to release. For the 42 persons serving deathâ€"commuted sentences, who were parolâ€" ed between January 4, 1968 and September 30, 1974, the averâ€" age time served rose to 13.55 years. This does not cover those who have not been paroled. This average time served is, of course, longer than that served from any other type of ofâ€" fence. We also have recent data on the Temporary Absence Program in our penitentiaries. During 1974, 1,019 temporary absence permits were issued to some carefully selected inâ€" mates convicted of capital murder. Current debate seems to have focused on the question of capital punishment. I feel that our chief concern should be to find the most effective means of preventing violent crimes in our society. Better trained, better deployed and better equipped policemen; effective gun control; proactive rathâ€" er than reactive police work; more effective correctional programs for juveniles and adults; more effective social and gconomic programs to remove causes of crime; improved treatment for alcoholics and drug addicts; improved educaâ€" tion and recreation programs;, possible restrictions on the showing of violence on television and other media; measures to promote respect for legitimate authority in the home, the school, the church, community associations and governâ€" ment. Pursuing such measures will do much more to lower our crime rate than the application of harsh penalties after the fact. Regarding your request for a plebiscite, may I say this: Under our system of responsible government, a Member of Parliament is elected to make the best decisions he can in the light of the information before him. It becomes the Member‘s responsibility to make those decisions and to acâ€" cept the consequences at the next election. The history of plebiscites in Canada has been a tragic one. A plebiscite tears the country apart and it is a complete negation of our Parliamentary system. _ â€" s One of the jobs of Parliament is to limit the debate in such a way that the country is satisfied that representatives from every part of the nation and every point of view have had their say. The vote is taken and then accepted. I can do no better than quote the classic statement of Edâ€" mund Burke to his electors in Bristol. "Certainly, gentlemen, it ought to be the happiness and glory of a representative to live in the strictest union, the closest correspondence, and the most unreserved commuâ€" nication with his constituents. Their wishes ought to have great weight with him, their opinions high respect. His unâ€" biased opinion, his mature judgment, his enlightened conâ€" science, he ought not to sacrifice to you, or to any man, or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure ... ... Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment, and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion."‘ I know at the moment I can make myself enormously popular by taking your advice and I would like to be popular â€" which M.P. wouldn‘t? But more than popularity I must live up to the responsibility of my office, as difficult as that may In my view, any Member of Parliament who would support the idea of a plebiscite is taking the easy way out by not livâ€" ing up to the obligations placed upon him by our Parliamentâ€" ary history and tradition. I‘m often asked if that is the view I have of our Parliaâ€" mentary democracy, why do I seek my constituents®‘ advice, and do I take that advice seriously. It‘s not an easy question to answer. . First, I am not a person who makes up his mind quickly. I‘m much too prone to see all sides of an argument and to recognize the merits of the various points of view. Nor am I unaware of the heavy responsibility that I must carry as a consequence of how I see the job of the Member of Parliaâ€" ment. at 12:15 p.m. Council chambers. Marsland Centre (20 minute Service). 2:15 p.m. Erb St. Mennonite Church 131 Erb St. W. Waterloo Speaker: Rev. Rufus Jutzi Everyone Welcome, Free babysitting WORLD DAY OF PRAYER for information: Phone 884â€"8345 Friday March 5 in Waterloo I could obviously avoid the difficult question of "why didn‘t you do what I told you to"‘ by not asking any questions and in fact, some M.P.s do not send out questionnaires to their constituents for that very reason. I prefer, however, to run that risk, as well as accurately reporting back to you and then holding myself accountable for the position I take. If you were the M.P., would you really vote on every issue based on numbers alone and against your considered judgâ€" ment? I don‘t think you would. That kind of an M.P. could be replaced by acentral computer connected to a push button in every living room. On the basis that the computer would more accurately reflect the public‘s view on every issue, some might say it‘s more democratic than the particular interpretation I place on Parliamentary democracy. But would that give us better government or help us resolve the wide range of opinions that divide us? It might, but I don‘t think so. More likely it would tear us apart and subject us to every current passion that seizes our society. I am convinced that many of the same people who now urge me to vote for capital punishment would change their minds after considering the horrors of the first execuâ€" I can appreciate your concern for the protection of society. It is a concern I share. I promise you that I will vote for any measure that will either prevent crime or increase society‘s security, and my record in the House of Commons demonâ€" strates my willingness to do that. I intend to hear the arguâ€" ments for life sentences, mandatory sentences and tougher bail and parole provisions. If I‘m persuaded that such amendments to the Criminal Code will help, I will vote for them. I sense from my conversations with my constituents that what they want, and have every reason to want, is freeâ€" dom and security for their persons, rather than capital punishment for the sake of hanging. Thank you for writing. I appreciate how you feel, but I do hope you will understand why I am taking the position I‘ve outlined in this letter. Waterioo Chronicle, Wednesday, March 3, 1976 â€" Page 5 84 King St. N Waterloo, Ont. (519) 886â€" 1660 Save np to )U ** T’whies TEAM SPORTS & TROPHIES TROPHIES 507 Jackets _ Cresting _ Uniforms 23 Water St. S. Cambridge (G), Ont (519) 623â€"958 1 * Hockey * Broomball * Bowling * Curling * Shuffleboard * Track and Field * Special Events My best wishes, Sincerely, Max Saltsman, M.P., Waterlooâ€"Cambridge. vG