THE PAPER IS PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH THE FINE SYSTEM IN CANADA, BUT EXAMPLES ARE GIVEN FROM SWEDEN, NORWAY, AND GREAT BRITAIN. THE HISTORY OF THE FINE IS TRACED BACK TO EARLY TRIBAL COMPENSATION PLANS. IN GREAT BRITAIN, WESTERN EUROPE, AND CANADA THE FINE IS STILL THE MOST WIDELY USED SENTENCE. FINES ARE THE CHEAPEST PENALTY TO IMPOSE, CAN BE VARIED TO FIT THE FINANCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENDER, CAN PROVIDE A FORM OF RESTITUTION, AND CAN BE CHANNELED BACK INTO THE TREASURY TO OFFSET THE COST OF ADMINISTERING JUSTICE. HOLLAND, WHICH MAKES WIDE-SCALE USE OF FINES, HAS A PRISON POPULATION OF LESS THAN 3,000. OTHER EUROPEAN COUNTRIES WHICH USE FINES INSTEAD OF SHORT-TERM PRISON SENTENCES REPORT THAT FINES ARE AN EFFECTIVE DETERRENT. THE TWO MAJOR PROBLEMS WITH ADOPTION OF LARGE-SCALE FINE SYSTEMS IN CANADA ARE THE LACK OF EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE CONCERNING THEIR DETERRENT VALUE AND THE FACT THAT IN CANADA THE LARGEST CLASS OF PRISON ADMISSIONS CONSISTS OF PERSONS IN DEFAULT OF FINES. THE PROBLEMS OF NONPAYMENT ARE EXAMINED IN DETAIL. COURTS ARE URGED TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN PERSONS WHO HAVE THE FINANCIAL ABILITY TO PAY BUT REFUSE TO PAY AND THOSE WHO DO NOT HAVE THE FINANCIAL ABILITY TO PAY. INCOME OF THE OFFENDER SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WHEN SETTING FINES. ALTERNATIVES TO PRISON SHOULD BE DEVELOPED FOR THOSE WHO CANNOT PAY, SUCH AS WORKING OUT THE FINE IN COMMUNITY SERVICE, DEFERMENT OF THE FINE UNTIL A JOB CAN BE OBTAINED, OR COMBINING THE FINE WITH ANOTHER PUNISHMENT. FOOTNOTES CONTAIN REFERENCES. (GLR)