Star. — London, England, 1810-05-02 00:00:00

.• TO BE SOLD, pursuant to an Order of the High Court of Chancery, bearing date the 9th day of April, 1810, made in a Cause wherein David Cunynghame, Esq. and others, are Plain tiffs, and John Lord Eldon, and others, are defendants, with the approbation of Robert Steel, Esq. one of tip Masters of the said Court, in Southampton-buildings, Chancery•lane a 1, ondon,. some time about the end of the month of May, or beginning of the month of June, 1810, in several Lots, SEVERAL FREEHOLD and COPYHOLD ESTATES, situate in the Parishes of Streatham and Lam beth, in the County of Surrey, late the property of Edward Lord Thurlow, deceased. The day of sale will shortly be advertised, and particulars may be had (gratis) at the said Master's Chambers, is Southampton-buildings aforesaid; of Messrs.' Forster, Cooke, and Frere, Solicitors, Lincoln's Inn ; and of Mr. James, Bos well-court, Carey-street, London, Land Agent, where a Plan of the said Estates now remain to be seen. PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 1. Mr. PETER MOORE presented a Petition from the Right Honourable Richard Brimsley Sheridan, Proprietor of the late Drury-lane Theatre, praying for leave to bring in a Bill for rais ing a sum of money by Shares, to erect a new Theatre.—Ordered to lie on the table. Sir WILLIAM CURTIS brought up the Report of the Corn tnittee to which the New Stock Market Bill was referred. The Worthy Baronet expressed his desire to state to the House a consstance which had occurred in that Committee, and to ascer tain the sense of the Chair upon it. When the question had been put, and a division about to take place, whether the pream ble of the Bill was proved or not ? a Gentleman then entered the Committee-Room for the purpose of voting. He (Sir William) felt it his duty to ask him whether he was accluainted with the satyre of the Question ? To which he answered In the negative. Tke division, however, took place, and that Gentleman voted, when the numbers were—Ayes 21—Noes 22. His object there fore was. to learn from the Chair whether a vote given under such eircusnEances was legal or not ? Mr. PETER MOORE observed, ant the alkdgei ignorance of the Gentleman was not as to the merits of the question, but merely to the technical form of the motion. The SPEAKER asked if the question was again put, and if the division took place subsequently to the entrance of the indivi dual I (which being answered in the affirmative), then, observed the Speaker, the vote was a good one. The Report was then received, and if the House shall agree with the Committee, the Bill will be of course lost. Mr. CROKER gave notice, that he would, to-morrow, in the Committee of Supply, move the Navy Estimates. The Scotch Decree Abridgment Bill was read a second time.— To be committed to-morrow. The LORD ADVOCATE of SCOTLAND gave notice of his Intention to move to-morrow that the House should resolve itself Into a Committee of the whole House, for the purpose of consi dering certain Resolutions for compensations to the Clerks of Session, Extractors, and others, affected by the late reforms in the Courts of Justice in Scotland. Upon the motion of Mr. WHARTON, the House resolved Itself into a Committee to consider the Acts relating to Insurance, In which it was resolved that the duties now payable upon Poli cies of Insurance in the West Indies should cease, and that for the future the Duty to be paid on every Policy to £lOO should be Ss. 6d. and for every nein exceeding £lOO there should be charged 2s. 6d. additional. The Irish Gaols Bill went through a Committee, the Report brought up, and the further consideration of it fixed for that day fortnight Sir JOHN NEWPORT wished to be informed when it was likely that a Return would be made to the order of that House - tnade last Session, and renewed in the present, for 'copies of certain Orders issued during the government of the Duke of Bed ford, relative to certain reforms in the department) of the Cus toms and Etc'lst ? Mr. WELLESLEY POLE said, the papers had arrived in London, and would probably be laid before the House to ntor- InOrrOW., SICILY. Mr. WHARTON brought up the Report of the Committee of Supply ; Upon the Resolution being. read for granting £400,000, The Honourable Mr. LAMBE rose to express his bopes, that the House would pause before it voted the additional sum of £lOO,OOO, proposed to be gran ted upon stipulations not yet ratified by the contrac ting parties. To adopt a contrary course would esta blish in his opinion a very bad precedent. Indeed he thought the House would but ill discharge its func tions to the country, if it shewed itself ready to vote away the public money,- upon stipulations not only not yet acceded to by tl'e Court of Palermo', but of whose nature it was wholly ignorant. There could be no objection at least to delay the grant of the new snm of IEIOO,OOO until the House were in possession of the information which was necessary. With re spect to the alledged stipulations, be was anxious to ascertain whether any of them were of a commercial nature. His reason was, that from authority in which he confided, he had understood that notwithstanding the assistance Great Britain afforded the Sicilian Go vernment, and though there was a great demand for British produce, still this country, in a commercial intercourse, was the least favoured ; and that actu ally duties were levied upon such articles tantamount to a direct prohibition. There were also connected with the question, considerations of high political im portance. Without going at large into the original policy of our connection with the Court of Palermo; be was aware that there existed reasons which com pelled us to continue our support ; but, at the same time, he felt strongly that this country should recom mend to that Court, the adoption of a system calcu lated to make British assistance available for its own ultimate security. He feared that it is too true, that 04 Sicilian Government not only looked for British assistance against the power of Francs, but required it to maintain their own anthoritragaitise the disaf fection of the Sicilian people—a disaffection not aris ing from any wild theoretic, or what was called, a Ja cobin spirit, but from oppressions long contiutod.— To a reform of such inveterate abuses that people looked with anxious expectation, and would naturally prefer such a reform to be effected under the counte nance of Great Britain by its own Government, than by any fallacious hope from French invasion. Still, however, if that was denied, he much feared that even to the chance of French assistance they would resort rather than continue under their present galling grievances, It was rather extraordinary that such was the feeling cf the Neapolitan people, that not withstanding all the enormities and exactions ever attendant upon French aggression, and notwithstan ding the good faith, the humanity, the love.of justice, so characteristic ,of British connection with Foreign • States, that still' they would prefer them to us, from no rather motive, but their apprehension that our suc cess would lead to the return of that worse domina, tion, of that bloody and unrelenting vengeance, which _ from their f' • GOvernment.- - - I Britain was not to take to their nicn upon the policy , - continuing. „ independence of giiil . Independent of tb t of that measure, this country was bound to ; al obligation of god faith. With respect to th Wi ; so- ! sition of the people of Sicily, be red t.t 6! Honourable Member had in his expresdions given too much encouragement to the opinion that such were the inveterate abuses of - the old and legitimate 'Go vernment, that the people took no interest either in their existence or subversion. It might be true that in Sicily there were persons so impregnated with French views as to feel desirous of any change, which should place them under French domination. Why not expect to find such a description of persons in Si cily, when we know that even amongst ourselves— even in Great Britain, there were to be found persons so mad and wild as actually to declare the country not worth fighting for—(Hear, hear, from the Minis terial Benches.) That a similar description might exist he would not deuy, but, he contendel, that it was by no means the general disposition of the peo ple. He deprecated the policy of this country dicta.' ting to foreign nations upon its plans of internal Go. vernment. Such a feeling should never be encoura ged, but particularly not wilco it was coupled with a tender of assistance. He could not see the force of the objection made to the additional grant, as it would be in the power of the British Government to reim burse itself for any excess in the antecedent payments out of the provision made for dre future installments. Sir JOHN NEWPORT contended, that when this country was making great sacrifices for Sicily, it should also take care that its money and strength were not misapplied. How came it, if it was true that Great Britain should not interfere with foreign States, even so far as to recommend measures of in ternal policy, that from the papers on the table it was Manifest that the Marquis of Wellesley did, in various instances, recommend to the Spanish Juntas what they should and ought to do before the Cortes were convoked? He did not complain of the course pursued by the Noble Marquis ; on the contrary, he considered the principle a sound one ; but he then mentioned it' as an illustration, to prove that the • views of the Chancellor of the Exchequer were not those put into practice relative to Spain. Why not . do that in Sicily which it was proved wets done in Spain ? The abuses under which the people of Sicily laboured were of long continuance, and of the most oppressive kind. They were sources of general dis affection, they deprived the Government of the co operation of the people, and consequently tended to render unavailable those exertions which Great Bri. tain was making for that power, at such risk and ex pence to herself. The Honourable Baronet was of opinion that the grant of the £lOO,OOO should be de ferred until the stipulations were ratified. General TARLETON observed, that the Right Honourable Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Ex. chequer) did not state a single reason why the House should agree to this resolution. He had gone into observations neither applicable to the question itself nor to the Gentlemen who coincided with him (Gene ral Tarleton). He had talked of Jacobins, and of something said somewhere, and by some persons ; but all this was wholly irrelevant to the arguments enforced against this proposed grant. In answer, be must tell him, that the best assistance Jacobinism, if it existed, could receive, would be from an unneces sary expenditure of the public money. There were numerous reasons why the additional grant should be delayed. In the present state of circumstances, it became the paramount duty of the country to hus band its resources, in order to be prepared, for those trying occasions which, from the present state of Europe, were likely to arise. Under such an im. pression, be felt it his daty to move, as an amend ment, that the sum of £3(X),000 be substituted in stead of the £.1.00,000 originally proposed. The House proceeded to a division, when the num bers were—For the Amendment 25. Against it 55; I Majority SJ. fhey • would expect from their former Government.— Surely when the great expense at which Great Britain Was at to defend the Sicilian Government, it was not calling for too much, merely to advise them to take such steps as should reconcile their authority to their Pwn pt►pple. Tile CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER $1441,9 Plumc tbattlinc Was no division of ()pi- PRIVATELY STEALING BILL. Sir S. ROMILLY moved the further cons:dera tioif of the Report of the Privately Ste‘aling Bill. The amendments being agreed to, he moved that they and the Bill should be engrossed. Mr. HERBERT expressed his concern at differing with the Learned Gentleman ; he was sorry he could not now agree with him. With respect to the fre quency of capital punishments, they were now con rably diminished. If we take from the list of those guilty of crimes pun'shable by death, the many who escape from the want of prosecution, by intercession, bribery, the ingenuity of counsel, and, lastly, the means of trial by Jury, w•e shall find the number of execu tions comparatively few. He lamented the many abuses arising from the maxim that crimes are pu nished not for satisfaction, but to prevent future crimes. The Learned Gentleman had asserted that the statute of Queen Elizabeth for punishing all per sons above the age of 14, capitally associated, to be a barbarous law ; the Honourable Gentleman should have recollected that in those times the Item comitatur was inefficient, incapable of even acting against gyp sies. Taking this into consideration, it would appear that this law was not unjust. Persons of such a deserip tion, a statute of Henry the Eighth condemns to ba nishment ; and afterwards one of Philip and Mary, enacts a capital punishment ; it is in confirmation of these that the law of Queen Elizabeth alluded to was' made ; have not we ourselves been as severe in the Acts we have passed in the case of the White Boys? If the laws of England are condemned on the princi.l ple of being enacted on an emergency, the Constitu tion must be condemned. He would ask wiiat nishment could be inflicted besides death ? Would the Honourable Gentleman wish, as in Russia, to in troduce the knout? would'he agree with the Marquis Beccaria, -and condemn a criminal to perpetual im prisonment ; adopt the mode of nailing the ears to a pillory, or solitary confinement? He believed there were many in the country who would strain every nerve to prevent solitary punishment.. We cannot lament the loss of the lives of individuals, when so' many public blessings arc obtained by it.' If means were rather taken, to prevent the extention of mita gions diseases, nineteen lives to one would be saved more than by the abolition of Capital punishment.— He deemed the terror of death salutary in preventing the crime of opening letters, Blackstone, he said, disapproved of the alteration of capital laws. For all these reasons he felt it his duty to negative tire en. grossmenr. Sir J. NEWPORT said, that if the Honourably Gentleman approved of the severity of the law, it was an_ tsecessary he should agree in the deduction from the change of eiriumstanees and. opini t .::, mak e neo 'L.- falle n in. prine o e,.thai the mass of mankind were injured by use, would it not be wiser policy so bloody a system was evident.' Mary case& could more conformable to the times ? The di ew , be adduced to prove that the severity of the law is not which waseo be left in the Judge was not 'cr -I° " so much feared as the certainty of it. He recollected and death, but as to the degree of punishne that some time ago, in Ireland, it was felony to cut a I inflicted, and when that punishment was ' tree by day or night. He was acquainted with a same repugnance in parties to prosecut very respectable person who took great pride in the exist. He would agree to the Bill of hit cultivation of trees, and on an individual's being taker Learned I riend, because it was an experit in the act of cutting one of them, he worked himself he thought might be safely tried, and up no carry this rigour into effect. Previous to the humble opinion would prove efficacious. Assizes he endured a constant agitation of mind, and The ATTORNEY GENERAL opposed when they did come, he declared that on considers- On the best consideration he could give tion he could not bring his mind to carry his rigorous he continued in the opinion that it weap. intent into effect. Such circumstances injure the continue the present criminal code. Wh country. A person guilty of a crime calculates not be its defects, be was persuaded that only on his punishment, but on the feelings of man- same time as mild and efficient as any kind ; thus we find, if a criminal is allowed to calcu. I devised. It was the great advantage late on his chances, the certainty of punishment is that it operated rather by prevention taken away. Every writer on the subject says that I ment—its effects were felt, or at least the effects of punishment result not from its severity before they were seen. He could not to but from its certainty. When the Honobrable Gen. retical speculations consent to alte r t h e I tleman speaks of trial by Jury, he should recollect stood. In the course of his practice he , I that it rather is a convincing proof of the assertions of as a criminal judge ; and he never knew ' his Learned Friend ; a Jury inclines to mercy, and in which the law was strained beyond the only way which presents itself of acquittal is by bounds. On all occasions he had known perjury; the Legislature should not therefore put and the Jury perform their duty. He such an onus on the mind of the people. The Ho- that the Bill of his Hon. and Learned pourable Gentleman goes to a different part of the but a preliminary to a greater ahem world to find a punishment. He certainly did not minal code, and he therefore felt liimse read the Act, or he would have seen that on the very necessity of opposing it. He could not face of it, his Learned Friend provides a punishment, loose a general discretion on so importer): by leaving it in the discretion of the Judge to inflict. He regretted that his Hon. and Learned ' He was well aware that solitary imprisonment is not condescended to take the opinion worse than death ;—yet, he believed, it would be e' Judges), who from the high offices they good to the community ;—for then the prisoner when be presumed to be best informed with - .1 - eft to commune with his own thoughts, would come particular parts of our jurisprudence. out reformed, and not, as now, instructed in the pro- respected the talents and industry of , fligacy of others. He, at present, would never cease Learned Friend, he could not give his , to say, that the Criminal Law was defective ; and overturning the whole system of our criminal hoped his Learned Friend woul:. continue his career his recommendetion. However multipl: of humanity until he had established his principles of under that system might be, it still was . capital punishment on a rock never to be shaken. advantages superior to that of any in the Mr. DAVIES GIDDY said, that he would offer possibility of inflicting punishment not • a few arguments, in which he would neither approve of tended to the prevention of crime. The nor oppose the mitigation of capital ltws, but rather now stood, ptoduced those effects which' adopt a middling course. The Learned Gentleman Learned Friend proposed in his Bill. in his pages says that Nature has fixed her limits on might perhaps possess more symmetry, one side of the question. He would say, 'that many more beautiful to the view, but he must ! theories are fallacious, and human judgments cannot if he made his election to abide by •• be all-perfect ; the mitigation of punishments he , quated and wholesome code. would leave to the Jury. With respect to punish. Mr. MORRIS would not presume ment without express rules, though the decision experience in criminal jurisprudence against would be arbitrary,• and, odious perhaps as the ex. the Honourable and Learned Gentleman pression might seem, still he conceived it to be an lase; but, limited as it might be, it was st approximation to perfect jurisprudence. He approv. convince him of the necessity of thealteration 'ed of the necessity of certainty in punishment ; he Until lately, his practice had been . 1 . thought, however, it should be united with severity; criminal courts, where he had full opportunie He adverted to the crime of sheep-stealing, which, acquainted with those pious perjuries, _ from the extent of our commons and the value of weaknesses which were cited by his Learned sheep, if not punished with severity, the consequences in proof of the imperfections and insuffi, - would be most injurious. He agreed in the mitiga. provisions in our criminal code. lie wa, tion of punishment for breaking open a door, which, great benefit would accrue from the adopts if many are connected together, condemns the whole. Bill, and it should therefore have his cos He would rather wish that the persons who ernme. The most effectual preventive of crime ; diately effected the crime should only be punished. would be to make the law as mild as possii I Mr. WINDHAM argued at length against the 1 the same time not to render it a dead : Bill. He defended the present system, on account of I Mr. FRANKLAND said, that, enter • the mildness with which it was administered, and tbe I did the highest respect for the telents an, tenor it held out to offenders. his Honourable and Learned Friend, The MASTER of the ROLLS supported the Bill, , agree' with him in his views of the sub . !, convinced that the object which it had in contempt*. i House. He wished that his Learned . tion would be effected if suffered to pass into a law. : oils to the introduction of his series of . I Without entering into an examination of the general ! suited those who were best competent ti opinions upon the subject, he would shortly state his . frmation. However sanguinary our ' reasons for thinking it deeireable, indeed he believed : might be in appearance, there was not . that it was agreed on all hands that it was so, the ; tical application so mild a system under I only question which arose was, whether if any other i fact, many of our laws were preserved ! punishment was marked out iestead of death for the i rorem. They were like a blunderbuss crime, it would have the effect of deterring persons i the window of an honest citizen retired i from the commission of it ? When any alteration in : try, kept there !o frighten away the thie , Ithe laws of the land was proposed to be made, it be- which a shot might not have been di! I came the House to look into them, and see whether , twenty years. He contended against I they were effective in their operation. Now what , the law against stealing in a shop, the had the Learned Gentleman who brought in this Bill which was absolutely necessary to protect said upon that head ? Why, he had stated, that in able artifices ernpluyed in the exposition many cases they were not operative ; for, that where , a commercial country like this, such L the crime was punishable with death, the punishment i cessary,for property could not be safe in very few instances had been carried into effect.--: He was adverse to weakening the penal The inference which he should draw from that cir- I feet of which would be more mischievotr , cumstance was, that either the law, or the practice of ; House was aware of. He was persuaded it, was wrong. Whichever was the case, the truth Ibe better to leave the application of the e I was, that it had been contended, the laws were not I tee the conscience of the Juries, the discreti efficacious in preventing the crime. The in fl iction of I ; Judge, and the Royal mercy, whenever death being abstained from, be apprehended that the : necessary. In a country where political I just conclusion to be drawn was, that the practice is ! freedom was so much enjoyed as amon/ I right ; because, if the law in itself was wrong, it minal statutes must of course be num ,. I would most assuredly have been noticed as such in were. These multiplied punishments 1 some way or other. If the practice then was not the price we paid for our liberty ; the ' blamed, and no fault had been found with the Judges balances that must unavoidably tare or the King's advisers, for not enforcing the law, it . tering our criminal system, or disturbing . clearly shewed that the public opinion was, that the , material degree, we should destroy those law is too severe, and is not adapted to the offence. . lofty sentiments which were the best safe! There seemed indeed to be a sort of universal confe- I Constitution. He thought the code mi,. ' deracy in the people to abrogate the law. In some ' allowed to remain as it was. It was less instances prosecutors did not like to go on to convic. !in effect than appearance. It prevented tion, because of the penalty to the offender. Juries' °to recurring to punishment. No other would in other cases exempt the offender from the was persuaded, would answer the great . capital punishment, so that it might not be left it lation so well. He must therefore oppose the breast of the Judge to execute it : nay, even conceiving it to be the first step towards , the Judges and the King's advisers were of the i and, in his opinion, dangerous innovation same opinion, and did not think it advisable to minal code. inflict a punishment which the law had expressly de. Mr. 'WILBERFORCE could not fined. With respect to the law then being effectual, our liberties could be infringed, or our offenders were prosecuted, and Juries were induced to minished by a mitigation of the penal acquit in many instances, not that they did not think : hundred years ago that penal code WAS the offender guilty, but because they thought the of. rigidly enforced. Since that period the fence was to be too severely punished with death.— ' capital punishments had g a redually decreased, The law, therefore, 'was not good which left to the yet our liberties had been more generally discretion of Juries to give a verdict contrary to their more deeply founded, and more thoroughL oaths, or as Blackstone emphatically termed such stood. The question before the House decision which placed Juries in the situation of o corn. the punishment of death ought to be ate mitting pious perjuries ;" because it was adverse to crimes under discussion ? In his opinion their feelings of justice. Ought the Law to stand He thought that the eyes of the country which men could not conform to, without sacrificing i ally opening to the defects of our criminal their feelings or their consciences ? It might be said, Ihe trusted, that by the adoption of the that it would be wrong to deprive the Crown of the r of criminals in penitentiary houses, crimes power of pardoning. Without wishing to deprive the I more frequently prevented, and crimie Crown of that power, it was quite another thing to . less injurious to society. With respect endeavour by indirect means to lessen that power, for I prison of the Honourable Gentleman it was never intended that the King should have the , ceded him, he should merely say, that it power of administering the laws generally, either ! the house which that Honourable Gentleman tinder the advice of the Judges, the Secretaries of , imagined, had fired his blunderbuss I State, or any other person whatsoever. In answer to : bad hit only once, lie would not have . those who objected to any general innovation of the I alarm in his neighbourhood. Such was . ~ ~ Lawee he would reply, that if Laws were, from the tion between those , who, according to the exisur4 civ f hui t htis l see. l fal len imnd discretion make new L aws e s not that of lit,. unishment to i x . d :pertine nt whi ch s.d which is hi s ins. opposed t h e B ill give th e " hit . ; ivottld be bat tt , Whatever snits,' at it was at L h e n3r that could be ge of this cede ion than , I st aPinehended, It upon any the, the law as it now he had often sat knew an insta nce eyond its prope r known the Jad ge He was (cur i a irncd Friend was erstion in the cu. imsclf under the I not agree to let portant a subject. arned Friend had In of those ( t h e they filled m ust 6 respect to the ice. Much as IF of his Han. aal his assent to tba • criminal law, at plied the offences was attended wits a the world. The not 'infrequently The law, as it hich his Hon. and ill. The sy stem etry, and a pp ear must excuse hint )y the more anti. !Ile to set up his against that ot leman who spoke was suf f icient to teration proposed. principally in the portunity of being 's, those amtabk Learned Friend iffieiency of many le was persuaded adoption of the is concurrence.— me, in his opin'or, Is possible; but at 14 letter. entertaining ash. is and motiv,s of d, he could not übject before • led Friend, of Bills, had at to give him .!;• nir criminal c not upon its pia.- ndcr the sun. In rVei only is !tr- uss and rattle in red into the coun- thieves, and front n discharged for nst the repeal of the exis;ence et wotect the j ustiti- ition of goods. Ia ch laws were ne- afe without them. enal code, the et- hievous than the rsuaded it would the criminal laws discretioa of the Lever it should be tical and personal nong us, our en. aimesous and se- nts were part ut le- were counter• ice place. By al. urbing it in any I , those high and safeguards of our :e might be safely Is less formidable :rated crimes with• other system, he Treat end of legis. oppos e this Bill. ards an important vation in the cri• lot conceive that our happiness di. enal code. 'fwo was much more d t h e num ber of r decreased, and terady diffused— ioroughlY under• use was, whether e annexed to the aion it ought not. nay were g radu• iminal law ; and. the confine' crimes would be imitalc rendered pect to the 0111. lan who had re' 3 t if the "me Gentleman s 187'2 times aai me excited inu:h I was the prof:Pc''' . 5 to the exiitirsg