707 E.-India Maritime Officers. {COMMONS} Turnpike Trusts (Scot.) 708 of common justice, to allow this Bill to be read a second time. The hon. Member concluded by moving that the Bill be now read a second time. Sir J. C. Hobhouse, in spite of the appeal made by the hon. Member for Worcester to his sense of justice, felt himself imperatively compelled-to oppose the second reading of this Bill, and he could not help thinking that he should be able to convince those hon. Members who had listened to the appeal of the hon. Member for Worcester, that it would be extremely unjust to the East-India Company to pass this measure. In the onset he must state that he had been no party to the arrangements from which those complaints now arose; those arrangements had been perfected long before he came to the office of President of the Board of Control. When, however, it was determined that the maritime officers of the East-India Company should receive compensation, it was quite clear that such compensation must be granted and awarded in one of two methods-either that all cases should be considered separately, with reference to their individual merits, or that if not considered separately some definite rule to apply to them should be laid down. The right hon. Baronet was here interrupted by An hon. Member observing, that forty Members were not present. House counted out. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MINUTES.] Bills. Read a second time:-Dublin Police. burgh, for Small Debts (Scotland) Bill; and for Repeal of Duty on Fire Insurances.-By Mr. DIVETT, from Exeter, for Repeal of Duty on Fire Insurances.-By Mr. PEASE, from Whitby, for establishing a Fund for the Relief of Widows of Officers of Excise. By Mr. ROBERT FERGUS SON, from Fife, for suspending the Act of Sederunt.-By Mr. STANDISH BARRY, from Kanturk, for Abolition of Tithes (Ireland); for Vote by Ballot; and for Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill.—By Mr. HUME, from Ilfra combe, for Relieving the Proprietors of the Shipping Ga zette, for the Postage of Letters containing only Commercial Intelligence.-By Sir R. VYVYAN, from Bristol, for better regulation of Bristol Court of Conscience.-By Lord Viscount MORPETH, from the University of Dublin, for conferring the Right of Voting for Members for the Uni versity, on those who have or who may in future obtain Moderatorships in the University of Dublin.-By Mr. HINDLEY and Mr. ARTHUR TREVOR, from various places, for Exemption from the Operation of Poor-law Act.-By Mr. ARTHUR TREVOR, from Paulsferry, for separating that Parish from the Pollsbury and Stoney Stratford Union, and adding to the Towcester Union.-By Mr. GRANVILLE, against the Abolition; and by Mr. HINDLEY and other Hon. MEMBERS, from various places, for the Abolition of Church-rates.-By Sir R. VYVYAN and other Hon. MEM BEES, from various places, against the proposed Measure. -By Mr. WARBURTON and Mr. WILKS, from various places, for the proposed Measure for the Abolition of Church-rates. TURNPIKE TRUSTS (SCOTLAND).] Mr. Maxwell, on moving for a return of the debts on the Scotch Turnpike Trusts, for which the trustees are personally liable, observed, that many of the roads in Scotland were of very recent formation, and made at great expense by reason of the hills, morasses, and ravines, which intersected that country. The tolls upon them were consequently very high, and the only means by which the pressure of these tolls was alleviated were to be found in the low rate of interest which was paid to the creditors upon them, owing to the collateral security of trustees, some of the most public spirited of whom were personally bound for the debts. The railway projected through the counties for which his notice for returns was given, had caused great apprehension that the creditors might call up the monies they had lent; or at all events demand five per cent. instead of three and a half, for interest upon their bonds. The trustees would be obliged in such cases to cease from paying off debt, and might be compelled to diminish the expense necessary for keeping the roads in the highest possible perfection, and to exact the highest possible rate of toll. The returns would show debt annually diminishing; money bonds chargeable with the lowest rate of interest; conveyances of the greatest weight carried through hilly districts with a very small horse power, by the smooth surface and level line of road formed by this system of personal liability, so creditable to the public-spirited persons who had come forward to establish these eligible lines of road for the public benefit. These trustees could not borrow at a higher rate of interest than five per cent., and could reap no profit whatever by such tolls on the traveller; whereas railway companies might gain twenty or thirty per cent, on travelling by their mode of conveyance; and might subject travellers on all public highways through which they passed to higher tolls or worse roads, and whose most valuable traffic,viz., passengers, they would carry away, to a decadence which would never be compensated to any but thoroughgoing travellers on one Solitary line of communication. The hardship upon trustees whose lands were taken, and assignees whose securities were de 1 preciated, appeared to him deserving of such consideration as they sought, not only on private, but public grounds; and he had accordingly brought their peculiar case under the notice of English Members who were not exposed to their peculiar difficulties by the English system of roads. Returns ordered. CRIMINAL LAW.] Lord John Russell: Sir, in rising to move for leave to bring in a Bill to abolish the punishment of death in cases of forgery, which it is my intention to follow up by moving for leave to bring in several other Bills respecting the criminal law of this country, I think it due to the House and to the country to state the motives which induce the Government to bring forward this subject at this time. In the present state of public business, when there are so many measures already before the House, each of which requires much consideration, I should have been most willing, if I could have done so consistently with my public duty, to postpone the measures for improving the criminal Jaw until a more convenient season. The course I am now taking is the result of the appointment of a commission on the criminal law, some years ago. It was the intention, in the appointment of that commission, that they should consider, first the propriety of revising the whole of the unwritten criminal law on the one side, and of revising the whole of the written criminal law on the other; and, finally, they were to consider the expediency of consolidating the whole. The Commissioners went through many laborious investigations of the subject, more especially of the unwritten law, regarding thefts. One of those investigations was exceedingly valuable, as showing the various decisions of the common law with respect to thefts. It soon appeared, how ever, that, to make a digest of the whole of the unwritten law, and also to make a digest of the whole of the written law, could hardly be done without, at the same time, endeavouring to bring them into a more regular and methodical shape. That question led to others, most difficult and intricate. Seeing the time which must necessarily elapse-seeing the great importance and the great intricacies of the questions thus raised, and which had changed the whole body of the criminal law, as it originally prevailed, and as it had of late been interpreted-the Commissioners had their attention directed to the present state of the criminal law, with a view to its reform, and the consequence of their attention being so directed was, that a report was presented to Parliament in the course of last Session, in which the Commissioners stated that, in their opinion, there were many offences now capital from which capital punishment ought to be removed, and that capital punishment ought to be limited to a small number of offences. With that opinion before me, it seemed essential not to go on for another year without bringing under the consideration of Parliament such amendments as could be made for the present, without waiting for the total reform and digest of the whole unwritten and written law. This opinion on the part of Government has been very much strengthened by a consideration of the present state of the execution of the criminal law in respect to certain offences. It was the opinion of Dr. Paley, and which, for a certain time, prevailed generally, that it was expedient to draw into the criminal net, as the law was called by him, a great number of offenders, and then to select a few upon whom it would be proper to inflict punishment. But the impolicy-and injustice, I might likewise say-of that mode of proceeding, was, I consider, fully demonstrated by Sir Samuel Romilly, when he undertook, to his immortal credit, and the great advantage of the country, to bring before Parliament the question relative to the improvement and reform of the criminal law. Without dwelling very long upon opinions which, I believe, are not now very generally entertained, I will proceed to state to the House one or two reasons why, the course advocated by Paley, is most inexpedient and likewise unjust. No one now doubts that it is the object of criminal punishment, not to satisfy the purposes of divine justice, nor to inflict human vengeance, but to deter from the commission of crime. But this purpose is not at all answered when you say that, out of a very great proportion of offenders, only certain victims shall be chosen on whom to execute the criminal law, without defining the aggravated circumstances in their cases which shall subject them to its operation. In almost every case where the extension of mercy is applied for on behalf of criminals, there are certain circumstances stated, which naturally suggest themselves | submit that the great disproportion between to the mind of every non-professional as the number of convictions and of execuwell as every professional man, as grounds tions in these cases is open to strong upon which that mercy should be ex- objection, and I instance the case of burtended as, for instance, where offenders glary as showing that a beneficial effect on are drawn accidentally into the commission the public mind does not result from the of crime, where persons have had a good present state of things. Besides that, it character before, where they have not been places in a very painful situation the guilty of any offence before, where they judges of the land, and the Secretary of have been misled by others, or where there State, who are obliged to administer a law is reason to suppose that they have not which generally is not carried into effect, been the most guilty in the commission of except in some few cases where it becomes the offence. There are various other expedient to enforce it, even to inflicting grounds of mercy which occur to every the extreme penalty of death. One of the person, the most simple as well as the cases to which I have referred was brought most learned. If we were to say, that we before the King in council; and it apwould not extend mercy to a certain peared from the circumstances, as detailed number of cases to which the penalty of at the trial, that the accused was a prodeath was affixed by the law, but that we fessed housebreaker; that he was a sort would choose, out of a very great number of master in the art, who taught younger of offences, those of an aggravated nature, thieves the science of burglary; and a on which to inflict capital punishment, it quantity of tools and instruments were would not be known, and it could not be found in his possession calculated to effect known, either to the persons committing an entry into houses: in fact, it appeared the offences, or to the country in general, that he kept a school or academy for what those features of aggravation were, teaching burglary. The second person the knowledge of which alone can be of executed was not exactly similarly situause in deterring persons from such crimes. ted: it appeared that he had committed I will now give a few instances, in order to burglaries on three consecutive nights, and show the great disproportion between the in one case in the house in which he had number of persons sentenced to death been before employed as servant. The under the present laws and the number third offender who was executed, was executed. In 1835, the whole number a man who was engaged in the Chipcondemned was 523; but the number exe- stead burglary (which I dare say will be cuted was only 34. In 1836, the number recollected by many Gentlemen), where a of persons condemned to death was 494; gang broke into a house armed with while the number executed was only 17. weapons, and being resisted they attempted With respect to certain offences, the to force their way, but were repulsed; punishments which have taken place are they returned, however, and in the course in great disproportion to the convictions. of their breaking in inflicted blows of a With respect to murder, for instance, severe nature on the inmates of the house. twenty-five persons were convicted in Now, the circumstances of these three 1835. One of these was pardoned in cases are widely different; and I would consequence, if I recollect rightly, of some defy any man to say that it could have informality in the indictment; three were been beforehand the intention of the law, transported; and twenty-one out of the as regarded any one of these cases, that twenty-five were executed. But with re- its peculiar circumstances could be taken spect to burglaries, 193 were convicted as forming a ground for the infliction of and sentenced to death, but only one was capital punishment. When the judges executed. With respect to the crime of think that the crime is so aggravated by shooting with intent to murder or maim, the circumstances by which it is accomsixty were convicted, and only two were panied that it should be visited with capital executed; and as to cases of robbery 202 punishment, no doubt they make the best were convicted, and no person executed. use of their discretion, and in such cases With respect to burglary, it appears from the Secretary of State would not be justithe returns that, since 1832, there have fied in interposing, for he could not find been three persons executed for offences of sufficient grounds for the extension of that nature. In 1833, one was executed; mercy. But at the same time, in respect in 1835, one; and in 1836, one. Now, I both to the judges and the Secretary of State, men's opinions do sometimes differ flict the utmost severity of the law? This as to the circumstances which call for is the ground on which, with respect to capital punishment, and therefore it is ex- this and several similar offences, I desired ceedingly difficult to determine the punish- the Criminal Law Commissioners to give me ment which should be inflicted in cases of an opinion whether there might not be some burglary; for the crime is of such a nature, definition suggested by which the punishand the circumstances connected with it ment of death should be reserved to a are frequently so varied, that amongst the smaller class of offences. In so doing I many persons found guilty of burglary did not ask, and I did not expect, that they some have been ordered for six months' should form any definition which would imprisonment; and in cases tried by the comprehend only those upon whom the Central Criminal Court some were sent to punishment was ultimately to be inflicted. prison for twelve months, some for six It would not be possible so to frame any months, and some only for three. This is law as to say that that law ought to be the first objection that is made to the pre- firmly and inflexibly adhered to; but I sent state of the law its extreme uncer- think that the law might be so far defined tainty of infliction, and the extreme uncer- that it could be said, generally, that pertainty and difficulty, or I might put it-sons who committed such and such an the impossibility, of saying by the mere authority of the judges what are the circumstances of aggravation which should make this crime a capital offence. But there is another objection to capital punishment so inflicted--that it is not in such cases calculated to inspire in offenders the dread which would render it salutary as an example. Where so much uncertainty exists in its infliction, an offender has the natural hope, which all men in that situation must have, that capital punishment will not reach him. He always thinks that he will be equally lucky with those who have gone before him in crime; and nothing can teach him to apprehend that while 290 persons necessarily escape capital punishment, and the 291st is executed, he may be that 291st who is doomed to suffer the extreme penalty of the law. It is the natural hope in every man's bosom that he will escape the worst; and it was a remark made by Bacon, with all his characteristic truth," that death, itself, for many hath no terrors." He said, that it was worthy of observation, that no passion in the mind of man was so weak but that it was able to make its possessor master over the fear of death. Death itself, for many, had no terrors; the passions of revenge, honour, love, despair, triumphed over and despised it, all operated to blunt the apprehensions of death; and with the timid, even, death lost much of its influence on the mind, fear pre-occupied it. If that be true, and if there are so many passions that overcome the apprehension of death, how easily may it be overcome when the apprehension of it is so distant that there seems scarcely a chance that the prisoner will be the one selected upon whom to in offence made themselves liable to capital punishment; and that it would be a question for the discretion of the judge, and afterwards for the Secretary of State, to consider whether or not there were circumstances which fully entitled the culprit to a merciful consideration. We ought to consider the subject with reference to what has been done of late years regarding the abolition of capital punishment; and if we find that, undoubtedly, the diminution of capital punishment has unfortunately led to the increase of crime, then I think we ought to pause before we make any more alterations. I have before me several returns respecting the number of crimes committed before and since the passing of the Act abolishing capital punishments in certain cases; and though these may not warrant us in coming to any conclusion as to the decrease of crime, certainly they do not support the argument that, by taking away capital punishment, crime has increased. I will take the best instance to prove this-namely, forgery-because that was an offence formerly punished capitally, and, with two exceptions, now punished only with transportation. It will be in the recollection of many Members of the House, that an attempt was made many years ago to abolish the punishment of death for forgery; and I think a Bill to that effect was read a third time; but Lord Castlereagh said he would take the sense of the House on the motion that the Bill do pass, and on a division the Bill was lost. A similar Bill passed the Commons in 1830; but Lord Lyndhurst, in a speech of great ability and knowledge, stated the objections he had to it in certain cases, particularly forgeries on stock and checks. On that occasion--the 1st of July, 1830 | death in certain cases of forgery was passed in Lord Lyndhurst said :--August, 1832. The only exception made in the Act was relating to the forgery of wills, and powers of attorney for the transfer of stock, or receipt of dividends. "From returns which he had seen, and the accuracy of which there could be no reason to doubt, it appears that the transactions of twenty bankers in bills and checks, in three days of the last month, amounted to no less a sum than 9,000,000l. sterling. The transactions of four banking-houses in the same way, in the course of one year, amounted to not less than 500,000,000/.; and the transactions of twenty other houses, within the same time, were not less than 1,000,000,000l., a sum greater than the amount of the national debt. "1833. The capital cases not sepa- 1834. Commitments for forgery, not Capital (forging a will). Capital (forging a will). Capital (forging a power of 58 1 63 1 54 1 And in the course of last year I received "Particulars respecting the Increase or De- 1835. That was argued by Lord Lyndhurst in the House of Lords; and the argument that they ought not to put in jeopardy so great an amount of property, and thereby shake the public faith in commercial transactions, had the desired effect, and on a division Lord Lansdowne, who brought in the Bill, had only twenty-two peers to vote with him, while there were seventy against him. Again, Lord Denman, when "The Report states the number of forgeries Attorney-General, brought in a Bill re- committed on the twenty-four firms, which are lative to the abolition of capital punish-members of the London Bankers' Association, ment, and it passed, with the exception of from the commencement of 1832 to March an alteration made in the Lords, by which forgeries on powers of attorney and wills were excluded from its operation. order to see the effects produced by that Bill, I have taken the average of three years before the passing of the Bill and three years after. The number of persons committed in the three years pre-five forged cheques and bills of exchange were "From August, 1833, to March 1835, twentyvious to 1833 was 155, and the three following years it amounted to 210. In the "In the first period the number of forgeries first instance only fifty-eight per cent. were averaged less than one per month; in the convicted, and in the latter period the second four per month, or, exclusive of the number convicted was seventy-one per eighteen forgeries committed by one person, cent. In the former, the proportion of 24 per month. But in the last period they persons acquitted was twenty-eight four-have averaged 12 only." In capital punishment was abolished, seven forged "From January to August, 1832, when the cheques were issued. "From August, 1832, to August, 1833, fortyeight forged cheques and bills of exchange were issued; eighteen of which were traced to be the work of one forger. issued. tenths, and in the latter it was twenty-one Now, when we consider the awful infour-tenths. From this it appears there fliction of capital punishment that used to is no great increase of the number of take place for forgery, it is consolatory to offences, while the number of convictions think that that capital punishment can be is materially increased, and the reason for done away, without increasing the number the increase of the commitments may be at- of offences, and, at the same time, increastributed to the diminution of the reluctance ing the security of the bankers and persons to prosecute when the offence was capital, engaged in trade and commerce. I should The following is the number of commit-state, that a case came before Lord Denments since the passing of the Bill, distinguishing those forgeries which are not capital and those which are capital:-"A Comparison of the Forgeries committed still Capital with those that are no longer so. "The Act abolishing the punishment of * Hansard, New Series, Vol. xxv. p. 843. man, where a man was tried for the capital offence of forging a power of attorney: that person forfeited his life; and, before the matter came before his Majesty in Council, I received a communication, in the name of a considerable body of the bankers of London, stating their objections to capital punishment; and also a letter |