IN THE MCCAUD TRILOGY OF CASES, THE CANADIAN SUPREME COURT RULED THAT THE BILL OF RIGHTS WAS NOT VIOLATED BY REVOCATION OF PAROLE WITHOUT HEARING, THAT PRISON SUPERINTENDENTS MAY MAKE ALL DECISIONS ABOUT PRISONER STATUS TO PROTECT PRISON SECURITY, AND THAT SENTENCE COMPUTATION IS BEWILDERING. HOWEVER, THE COURTS WOULD SUBSEQUENTLY ESTABLISH THAT OFFENDERS MUST BE GIVEN A REASON FOR REVOCATION OF THEIR PAROLE. ALSO DISCUSSED IS THE RIGHT OF DEFENDANTS TO BE PRESENT AT SENTENCING AND CASES PERTAINING TO THE CANADIAN PAROLE ACT, SECTIONS OF WHICH ARE REPRODUCED. DAY PAROLE, INTRODUCED IN 1968, ALLOWS SOME INMATES TIME AWAY FROM PRISON DURING THE DAY. HOWEVER, AMBIGUITIES IN THE LAW ESPECIALLY REGARDING STIPULATIONS FOR ITS REVOCATION, PRESENT PROBLEMS. CASES AND RULINGS ARE ALSO DISCUSSED FOR 'SENTENCE MERGING,' OR MERGING TWO OR MORE SENTENCES BEING SERVED BY A SINGLE OFFENDER WITHOUT REDUCING EITHER. SENTENCE MERGING WAS INTRODUCED IN 1969 TO SIMPLIFY PAROLE AND SENTENCE REMISSION PROBLEMS. FINAL ISSUES DISCUSSED INCLUDE SENTENCES FOR OFFENSES COMMITTED BY PAROLEES, AMOUNT OF AN OFFENDER'S SENTENCE THAT MAY BE COMMUTED, AMENDMENTS OF THE PAROLE ACT SUBMITTED TO PARLIAMENT, INMATE CIVIL RIGHTS, PRISON DISCIPLINE, SOLITARY CONFINEMENT, INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFER, AND REMEDY AND PROCEDURE. ALTHOUGH JUDICIAL REVIEW IS RECOMMENDED, IT IS NOT EXPECTED TO BETTER INSURE THEIR RIGHTS. REFERENCES AND FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED. TEST CASE LITIGATION IS APPENDED. (PAP)