PROVISIONS IMPOSING PENALTIES OF IMPRISONMENT UNDER COMMONWEALTH LEGISLATION WERE EXAMINED WITH THE AID OF A COMPUTER-BASED LEGAL INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM. THE EXAMINATION OF AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY LEGISLATION WAS UNDERTAKEN MANUALLY, SINCE THE LEGISLATION IS NOT INCORPORATED IN THE COMPUTER SYSTEM, THE PAPER DISCUSSES THE IMPORTANCE OF SETTING PENALTIES AS AN INDICATOR TO COURTS OF THE LEGISLATURE'S ATTITUDE CONCERNING THE GRAVITY OF AN OFFENSE. THOSE OFFENSES CALLING FOR TERMS OF IMPRISONMENT ARE EXAMINED TO DETERMINE WHETHER DISPARITIES EXIST IN THE PENALTIES PROVIDED FOR SIMILAR CONDUCT, WHETHER CONSISTENCY IS LACKING IN THE LEVEL OF FINES PROVIDED AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO IMPRISONMENT, AND WHETHER UNIFORMITY IS APPARENT IN THE RATE OF IMPRISONMENT PROVIDED FOR DEFAULT IN THE PAYMENT OF FINES. ALSO, THE PAPER EXAMINES THE NATURE OF PENALTIES PROVIDED FOR CORPORATE OFFENDERS, THE EXTENT OF PENALTIES FOR SECOND AND SUBSEQUENT OFFENSES, AND THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE LAW PRESENTLY IMPOSES MINIMUM PENALTIES. PROPOSALS FOR REFORM INCLUDE A REVIEW OF ALL OFFENSE PROVISIONS IN COMMONWEALTH AND AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY LEGISLATION AND THE IMPLEMENTATION CHANGES FOR GREATER UNIFORMITY. APPENDIXES CONTAIN TABULAR DATA ON FINES AND IMPRISONMENT, COMPUTER SEARCH TERMS, AND THE RANGE OF MAXIMUM PENALTIES. (MRK)