The Press. — London, England, 1858-02-13 00:00:00

Cl tt a a Ii C 11 1 a tl tl s 0 It it ti ti 0 fi ii tl h tl e 0 e Pi C Vi ei it h tl tl tl al ft al d VI al ri P' VI CI q, tl b E to n , tc p 1 gi tt jc 13 ~.'s~~s= , .. THE PRESS, FEBRUARY 13, 1858. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY asked the right hon. gentle man if he would lay on the table an authenticated ac count of the state of Indian finance before the committee was taken on the bill. The CHANCELLOR of the ExcilEguen said that the returns in question were in the bands of the printer. The bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Monday next. twenty-five members, and the following gentlemen were appointed members :—The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Disraeli, Sir J. Graham, Mr. Spooner, Sir Charles Wood, Mr. G. A Hamilton, Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Cayley, Sir Francis Baring, Mr. Vance, Mr. Cardwell, Mr. Blackburn, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Weguelin, Mr. Hankey, Mr. Hope Johnstone, Mr. Ennis, Mr. Pu ller, the Earl of Gifford, Mr. Fergus, Mr. John L. Iti. cardo, Mr. Tucker Smith, and Mr. Glyn. 151 a defect in it. Finding that in England conspiracy to commit murder was only a misdemeanour, while in Ireland it was a felony subject to the highest punishment, the Government thought it would be an improvement to mitigate the severity of the Irish law, and at the same time increase that of the law of England. With respect to the time, he admitted that paragraphs had appeared in the French paper highly offensive to the people of this country; but if we placed ourselves in the position of the French nation he thought the Government of this country, in similar circumstances, would bo justly blameable if they bad not called the attention of that of France to what appeared to be a defect in their law as Count Walewski had done, without specifying any particular alteration. There was nothing in the Count's de• spatch which should deter us from doing what we believed ought to be done, and which was not repug nant to the principles of our law and constitution. In conclusion, Sir George read the despatch from Count Walewski to Count Persigny, dated February the Bth. That despatch, he observed, would be laid before Parliament in the course of the present week. ' Mr. Bovux opposed the bill, on the ground that the law as it stood was sufficient, that the pro. posed alteration in the law would prove utterly in effective, and that the next demand made would be for the expulsion of aliens on their arrest upon mere suspicion. Mr. HOPE likewise opposed the bill, which ho be lieved would remain a dead letter ou the Statute book. Mr. COLLIER, in supporting the bill, said very grave doubts were entertained lay lawyers whether the conspiracy in question was an offence by our law; but, assuming it to be so, it was a misdemeanour only, punishable by fine or imprisonment : Even if the offence was punishable under the existing law, in what category was it classed? A conspiracy to commit wholesale murder stood on exactly the same level as a conspiracy to pass off bad wine as the true wine of Por tugal in exchange for goods ; or a conspiracy to charge a man with being the reputed father of a bastard; or a con spiracy to pass off a person as a man of property with a view to defraud tradesmen. When, therefore, his honour. able friend ( Mr. Roebuck) asked why increase the punish. ment of conspiracy, his ( Mr. Collier's) answer was, because the crime is a great one. Mr. HUNT opposed the bill. Mr. WHITBREAD supported the bill, contending that it was not the liberty of the subject, but the licence of the assassin that was restrained. Mr. BENTINCE spoke in favour of the bill, and con• damned what he deemed the coarse personalities directed against the Emperor of the French, as a departure from the courtesy and usual course of pro ceeding in that house which he hoped not to see repeated. Mr. MILNES said it was a grave thing to alter the law of England upon the plea that it was necessary to make some demonstration that would satisfy France. lie believed that it would in no degree satisfy the French people—that it would only show our own weakness and lead to further demands. Mr. NAPIER supported the introduction of the measure ; he believed the proposed alteration a wise one, and the time opportune. He grounded his opinion, first, on the unwise inequality of the punish ments awarded in England and in Ireland for the offences treated by the bill, the punishment in the former place being only that allotted to misde meanours, while in the latter it was death, and the bill would assimilate the two, by increasing the punishment in England, and ameliorating the severity which existed in Ireland. And, if the justice of this change were admitted at home, surely it was not to be refused or postponed, because it would also operate justice to our allies on the other side of the Channel. He said, "Be just, and fear not." As to the effect on other continental nations of conceding justice to the claims of France, he urged that Eng land could never stand well with any country if her only reason for refusing that which was wise and just was that it was asked for by an ally, who wished to throw additional protection around the person of the sovereign of their choice, Lord J. RUSSELL, after noticing the disadvantages of this discussion, expressed a doubt, assuming that the bill was introduced as an amendment of the law, whether it was really an amendment. He looked, he said, not only to the principle of the proposed change, but to the nature of the crime, which was exceedingly difficult to prove, and juries would hesitate to convict if the penalty were ren dered more severe. Tho spirit of the proposed enactment was contrary to the whole course of our modern enlightened legislation. But the proposed change was not likely to defeat the political conspira cies against which it was directed, because the con spirators were men who were ready to expose their lives, which would be sacrificed whether they succeeded or failed in their attempt. The object should be not the punishment, but the detecting the crime, and the hill would serve no purpose of detection. Then mune the question that this altera tion of the law was asked fur by the Government of Fotoce, and when that question was approached, C3NSPIRACY TO MURDER DILL. Lord PALMERSTON, pursuant to notice, moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend the law relating to conspiracy for the commission of murder. Having referred to the recent atrocious attempt against the life of the Emperor Napoleon as a con spiracy apparently concocted in this country, and baying explained the regret of the Emperor at the appearance in the Moniteur of certain violent pas sages in the military addresses, Lord Palmerston proceeded to say that on examining the state of our law it appeared that it treated conspiracy to commit murder as a misdemeanour, although in Ireland it was a capital offence. He thought it would be an improvement to make the law of the United Kingdom in this respect uniform, and he proposed to render conspiracy to commit murder a felony punishable by penal servitude, at the discretion of the court, for life or not less than five years, with imprisonment with or without hard labour for three years. The bill would apply to all parties, British subjects and foreigners, and whether the object of the conspiracy were English or foreign, resident in this country or abroad. It was due, he thought, to the character of thi• country to go as far as we could, without violence to the Constitution, in showing our feelings regarding the late atrocious crime in France. Mr. A. W. KINGLAKE moved, by way of amend meat, a resolution to the effect that, while the house sympathised with the French nation on the atrocious offence in question, it deemed it inexpedient to legis late in compliance with the demands made in Count Walewski's despatch of the' 20th of January until further information is before it of the communica tions between the two Governments subsequent to the date of that despatch. He objectei to the motion, he said, because he declined to alter our municipal law at the suggestion of any foreign Go vernment. Either the measure was a portion of our law reform, or it was a political action suggested from abroad. If the former, it should have been incorporated in the projected law reforms of which the Attorney-General had given notice. This amendment was seconded by Mr. HADFIELD. Mr. BOWYER supported the original motion. Thc: house, he observed, was not asked to alter the law of this country, but the penalty ; to make our law more effectual for the protection of other nations. Mr. Fox said his principal objection to the bill was that it. would alter our law in compliance with external suggestion. Should this measure pass, political refugees would say, " If this be done to oblige France to-day, what will not be done to oblige Austria or Naples to-morrow ?" We should thereby set a bad example to weak nations, and there would not be a spot in Europe on which a political exile could set his foot. Mr. GILPIN opposed the bill, and indulged in much violent personal abuse of the Emperor of the French, especially with reference to the Boulogne expedition, in which the hon. member declared the Emperor to have deliberately committed murder. Sir J. B. WALstx supported the bill, and defended the character of the Emperor of the French from the abuses so freely lavished. Lord ELCIIO could vote for neither motion. Two things, he observed, were to be considered—first, the state of the law ; secondly, the time at which it was proposed to make this alteration. The house would act hastily if it passed the measure without being fully satisfied that the existing law was insufficient, and if it legislated at this moment, after the ad dresses published in the Moniteur, it would create an erroneous impression abroad. Mr ROEBUCK likewise considered the motion as in volving two questions—whether the law required any alteration, and whether this was the time and the right mode of making it. He argued that the pro posed alteration of the law would have neither pre vented the crime in question nor facilitated its dis covery. But, supposing the alteration to be re quired, was this the right time, after the Emperor of the French had insulted the people of England and by his satellites threatened them? How came the ,addresses into the Moniteur? By the order of the Emperor. It was he, then, who through the Moni teur had insulted the people of England. This was not the time at which the House of Commons ought to consent to such an alteration of the law, sup posing the alteration to be a good one ; for if the great people of England altered their law upon a threat, it would be a humiliation and degradation, and therefore he opposed the bill. On the motion of Mr. WARREN, the debate was ad journed. The nomination of the Select Committee on the bank Acts was agreed to, after a brief discussion. It was agreed that the committee should consist of GAOLS AND HOUSES OF Mr. BOWYER obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the Act 4 Geo. IV., cap. 64, for consolidating and amending the laws relating to the building, re pairing, and regulating of certain gauls and houses of correction in England and Wales. Mr. H. HERBERT obtained leave to introduce certain bills. The house adjourned at a quarter past one o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS—TuEsDir. A bill for reforming the Law of Debtor and Creditor was introduced by Lord Sr. LEoNARns, and read a first time, afwr a brief conversation, in which Lord Campbell, the Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham, and Lord Wensleydale participated. The Trustees Relief 13111 and the Transfer of Estates Simplification Bill were read a second time. Their lordships adjourned at half-past fiva o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS-TUESDAY. NEW MEMBER. Mr. BRIGHT, who was warmly cheered from all parts of the house as he approached the table, made the declaration required from members of the Society of Friends, and took his seat for Birmingham, in the room of Mr. Muntz, deceased. He was introduced by Mr. J. B. Smith and Mr. Ricardo, and was heartily congratulated by several members upon his reappear ante in Parliament. The declaration having been subscribed, Mr. Bright took the seat which he occu pied during the last Parliament, below the gangway on the Ministerial side. INDIAN GOVERNMENT. Mr. T. BARING presented a petition from the East India Company, deprecating all change in the organi. sation of the Indian Government " during the con tinuance of the present unhappy disturbances, and without a full previous inquiry into the operation of the present system." The hon. member an nounced that, when the India Reform Bill was brought forward, he should propose an amendment enunciating the opinion that it was inexpedient to legislate on the subject under present circumstances. JEWISII After an appeal from Lord PALMERSTON, and in spite of some remonstrances from Mr. NEWDEGATE, Mr. T. DUNCOMBE consented to postpone his motion relative to the non•admission of Baron Rothschild to his seat in the house. . The adjourned debate on the Conspiracy to Murder Bill was resumed by Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, who corrected some popular errors regarding the incidents attending the attempt male many years ago by Louis Napoleon at Boulogne : An hon. gentleman, a member of the Society of Friends, and be supposed also a memter of the Peace Society, had last night made a very inflammatory speech, in the course of which he said that Louis Napoleon, when he landed at Boulogne, shot a man with his own hand—LMr. Gilpin here made a remark]. Well, assassinated a man himself, if the hon. gentleman prefers that phrase. Now there was not a word of truth in that statement. What really °cm:wed —and knowing the facts, he felt it to be his duty to state them in order to disabuse the press and the public mind on the subject—was this :—The party that landed at Boulogne were armed with pocket pistols, and in laniing a pistol of one of the followers of Louis Napoleon went otl —he had only one pistol himself, which was not fired—and the ball went through the cheek of a man who was shouting " Vive L'Empereur," and who soon recovered from his wound. The only persons killed were two followers of Louis Napoleon ; one of them, M. Forgue, was shot in the back of the head by a National Guard, and the other, Count Dunain, who was severely wounded by a gendarme, crept into a wood shed, and was afterwards thrown into the sea, where he was found with three balls in his body. These were the only deaths which occurred when Louis Napoleon landed at Boulogne, and therefore the hon. member for Northamptonshire proved too much when he spoke of him as a man who was denouncing assassins when he was an assassin himself. Mr. WARREN rose to oppose the motion. He believed, he said, that the measure was not called for ; that it would prove ineffectual, that it would be derogatory to the national spirit., and a libel upon the law of England. Nor was this the time when the house ought to be called upon to alter that law, after what he regarded as a menace. Sir G. GREY replied to the objections offered to the motion. These, he observed, were of two classes— one directed against the enactments of the bill itself, the other against the time at which the proposition was made. As to the bill itself, irrespective of any communication with the French Government, upon looking into the state of our law upon this subject, the attention of her Majesty's Government was called by the transaction at Paris to what appeared to be ~