[2] For capital crimes, since the time of Henry III, those under the age of seven could not be convicted, and those between seven and fourteen were prima facie considered to be doli capax (except where the court found them capable of distinguishing between good and evil).

[5] Children and teenagers were forced to serve their sentences alongside adult offenders in typically filthy, overcrowded prisons.

[6] In 1857, the Province of Canada passed its first Acts concerning juvenile offenders, providing special procedures for the trial of persons aged 16 or less,[7] and maximum penalties for larceny (other than by indictment) of three months' imprisonment or a fine of £5.

[13] While Canada did not otherwise distinguish their terms from those given to adult offenders, Nova Scotia passed legislation that limited juvenile sentences to 90 days.

[13] In 1868, the new Parliament of Canada provided for the transfer of "incorrigible" juvenile offenders from a reformatory to a penitentiary to serve the remainder of their term.

[17] This reflected concerns that those sentenced to terms of greater than five years were at higher risk of recidivism, and were thus beyond the reach of successful intervention.

Ontario passed the Industrial Schools Act in 1874,[31] in order to provide institutions to serve neglected and problem children.

In reintroducing the Bill, Senator Béique summarized the philosophy it expressed: It is unquestionable that the principle of the probation officer or of the probation law, as applied in England many years ago, as applied in this country many years ago also, and especially the principle of probation officers, persons whose duty it will be to take care of these children, to follow them, to ascertain as to whether they attend school, whether they associate with persons of bad character or not, and adopting means of protecting them throughout their younger years, that a law of that kind cannot fail to have very beneficial results.

The definition of "juvenile delinquent" was declared to cover any "child who violates any provision of the Criminal Code or of any Dominion or provincial statute, or of any by-law or ordinance of any municipality, or who is guilty of sexual immorality or any similar form of vice, or who is liable by reason of any other act to be committed to an industrial school or juvenile reformatory under the provisions of any Dominion or provincial statute.

Prior to the 1929 revisions of the Act, poverty and gender shaped the definition of delinquency with class stereotypes militating against the persecution of wealthier children.

[47] Gender stereotypes, by contrast, ensured that girls were charged for sexual behaviours and expressions considered "non-delinquent" in the male world.

Court officials frequently asked girls charged with petty crime (like theft) to describe their sexual experiences.

The definition of "delinquency" was so broad that youths could be charged for breaking minor laws, including truancy, coming home late, or loitering.

State officials were most likely to view acquiescence as "withdrawal," keeping First Nations girls in the system longer under the assumption that they would not internalize "proper" feminine mores.