The Statesman. — London, England, 1823-05-22 00:00:00

a: STATESMAN mischief there o ground of punishmen*. But it was not the sole ground—punishment must not only he just bat exemplary. It should inspire fear, and be as mach as possible calculated to work through the appre hensions as the conduct of individuals. If it excited other feelings—if it overcame nature and excited horror by its disproportion of the offence, it ceased to be exem plary. The mischief of the act was the growl , ' of pu nishment, the sympathy of mankind seas the regulator of its extent ; every attempt to force it beyond the mark which was pointed at by that great criterion, only re volted human feeling and weakened its efficacy as a source of protection to tlie conitimnity. iVhat but the enormous disproportion of the vengeance inflicted upon the followers of paricutac doctrines, could account fur the well-known inefficacy of cellgioua persecutions?— why did the failure even become pr iverhi.ll? —the blood of the Martyrs was the seed of the Unn reit. The feelings of nature overcame the mune:mired fury of the perse entos ; the nunii.liment instead of being snppomed by synvithy excited horror ; the sufferer I•ecante the object of admiration and reverence. Opialurarn jettlicia delet dice, se.l natrcreejudickopido coVirsnat. But this aas not peculiar to the case of religious perse cution. Bow was it that an institiition which may be tol d in one age was universally reprobated in an other. The great Sir Thomas More was known to so perintenil the literal execution of that bloo iv and bar barous punishment for the crime of high Trea son; and yeta turg interval did not elapsa before that sentence was dispensed with, as being tom barbarous to be carried into execution. lience then it was to be in ferred that the efficacy of punishment depended als3 on the state of feeling in a particular age. Nothing was morefalse in the theory of legialatioii than the (minion that there is great deliberation in the comidssion of crime. The criminal, it would be found, more frequently did not reason at all, but yielded tt. the force of those passions, which being eirly indulged in, acquired vigour as he advanced, which •• Grew with his growth and strengthened with his strength." What rendered the law truly efficacious was this, that it formed a school of instruction en 1 morals, which, by its reasonableness and its consistency with established no tions, gained at once the acquiescence of public opinion —that it represented the feelings of :01 go ad men in so. ciete. But a hat sort of morals did they, in their system of obtains' legislation p-oinnl u zay, when they said that lie who cut down a twig, or dosfroyed a olierry•tree, or stole a sheep, was as !deck a ceimin II as he who betrayed his country toe foreign yoke, or spilled the blood of the twine who gave bi:n birth. Bet no: such a system could not succeed. Thank Con ! that tainfpiracy of the Criminal Law against the moral feelings of tuankint! absolutely failed. Thank GOD! there were feelings of Deere which no curriirtion, no sophistry could over- CIIIIC—(Hear.) Bet it was nut to the inefficacy Of the law Mole that t' ey were to confine the evil cooseiriencess of its undue rigour. lie lair became contemptible in its fedora. It nas itself b• came the oluject of that die. I gnst hirb it faikel to inswro against ineifferent act.. He alive% s conceived that there was a great unders•ate went in broiling one's observations as to the repugnance that was felt to prosecute where tins punishment WWI too large, to those is ho were imm•distely interested in take in` justice on the uffeterler. When the prosecutor had overcome his natural rib:wine:a against the author of the mischief so far as to forego an appeal to the law, he. rause of the excessive rigour of its punishment, how much more strongly meet those sentiments animate the impartial skidoos ! hoe' much more the remote public, who read the history of such cases! It should he re membered, tl.en, thin the instances of want of prosecu tors were bet •the outward and visible signs of that alienation from the law which pervaded the community. .11y these marks did the universal spirit indicate itself. Laws such as there did nut depend un the sanction of good men. No; good men repudiated them ; they saw that Gaut just balance which should be maintained be tween crime and punishment, in order to render the latter efficacious, wes destroyeJ in the laws of England, and that they lessened the general horror for the atrocity of certain climes. lie losked upon every instance of the executjon of a &mei:vitt-tiler as a diminution of the security of humiin life. The punishment of death for an offence, which, in the public judgment, did not merit that extreme rigour, abated the influence of that solemn pnnishment in Cases in which the consent of the whole of nraukind drelarr,l it to he just. It was said that the abject of the present system of Criminal law was to de ter from the commissii ri of crime by the severity of the puinishinent held forth; but if such was its object, it seas the worst calculated to attain it, which the ingenuity of wan meld devise. if it were framing a system of law to he laughed at, or for sums purpose the reverse of Uto pian. lie wool ask, was this the system of the ancient law of England ? Was that code tilled with so many crimes and vet was its result less efficacious, twits example less influential ? Not tnnre than 4 capital felonies composed the ani tent Criminal Law of England. The penal Lies which . ner.v crowded our statute book were the mushroom growth of modern wanton legisla tion. in all the capital punishments which he would propose to take away. only two were in existence before the Revolution. Let him not, therefore, be told that the system was to be defended upon the ground of its anti quity. 'This he considered as the reproach of a century, which he admired for almost every thing else. He did rot mean to charge Parliament with barbarity, but they Were guilty of a criminal neglect in not watching the sacred principle of the inviolability of life. From re ports made from the time of the revolution downwards, it appeared that convictions for capital crimes had gene OD increasing, and executions diminishing. This was the necessary concluence of the increase in the penal laws. If they looked to the codes of antiquity, they found that the Hebrew law allowed of only one ea, *tal penishmint for theft, and that was for the horrible ensue of man-stealing. The Hon. and Learned Gentle man then alluded to some tables which he introduced gut sear as to the number of convictions and executions in huge. It had been argued that the police account ed for the comparatively small numbers in that country. list he (reentrant within the last nine years, the convic tions fur capital offences in England had trebled, while ham in France had only increased one-fourth ; and dur ing that time there bad been no alteration in the state of •the Pulite. The French ode had now only six capital pasishinents, and there was only one for theft. The one was in a tutor berg bay aggravated by so many circum stances, that it • ould seem impossible for it ever to or est. e Resolutions be was about to propose he should Sew read. The substance of them was in the know- Wee of tiovrrnmcn', end abet their intentions were tree Ma sub e• t be did not know. After a general reso- Winn. be should propose several other resolutions as the fretesuatiuri of Bills. The first was to declare the ex pediency of takmir assay the punishment of death in err taia ream If Ibis were carried, he should then move to substitute the penislumeet of transportation in such eases. There would he two o hers, one declaring it expedient to make a provision that the Ju,:ees shou!d not pronounce sentence of death where ther e was nu expectations of its Wag carried Ulm teeter:um ; and the second, that there shesll be no confiscation of the property of suicides, and that na indignity should be utfe, ed to tneir remains. He sidled to get rid uf the rapital f-lotties • lined in the Black Art, with the exceeiima of two ; the setting tire dwelling-400vs, mod maliciously showing. His Re- SaliVi(nliwould neat ge to 110 away the tier capital crimes blue by the ,glut rage Act. If, on this subject, he *Wide be itOttep.it. ml by the Noble Matrimonial Re Leiser" is the other liaise of Parliament, in that oast, b. is every othe,, tie shuuld b• happy to follow their leutsteirs instead ot leading the way, so the object *hlch he hat at heart could be obtained. lie should also idler a similar proposition with respect to the capital felo nies which the Cowinlttee on the Criminal Laws had re commended should be done away. Bills on almost all of these subjects had passed that House, but had failed in another place. He had, besides, to propose a general re solution on the subject of forgery, to take from that crime the punishment of death. The propriety of making the changes which he called for, had been admitted by the (louse; hot he by no means wished to he understood to say, that they w e re p rec l u d e d f rom app l y i ng suc h mo di fi . elation as they might think proper. 'I here were other of. fences, hot which he desired to deal with in a simi. 14r manner, and among these were horse, sheep, and cat tle stealing, and larcenies in dwelling-houses and on navi gable rivers. Tbe executions far the last mentioned of fence had in fourteen years been one in sixty-six of those brought to trial. 'rile laws s it was thought, punished the Cafith man, who suffered, but produced nu salutary impres apart on the other 65. He objected to the character of a crime being determined by aueount in any case, as there was not mere depravity in stealing a greater than in taking . a lesser su n. It was o ff ens i ve , i n hi s v i ew , to knee round the property of the rich with severer pun ishments than those which visited the depredators who seized on the humble possessions of the poor. He was against such a distinction, and if any distinction were made, he would rather reverse than adhere to the prin. eiple now acted upon. It was the defective state of the law in this respect which caused the numerous pious perjuries which took place at the Old Bailey, a. Jurors persuaded thents.dees that it was less objectionable to find a thing of smaller value than it was in reolity, than to give a verdict which, under the severe enactments of the law, would go to the destruction of a fellow-creature's life. He 'hewed the Act of the Ist of George IV. had made the previous enactments with respect to all ea- Ines between 40,. and 151. a dead letter ; so that with respect to these no repeal of the law was twee s try. Ile then examined the provisions and preamble of the Black Act, and contended that no law ever bore more distinctly on its forehead the stamp of a temporary measure than that did. Having enumerated the various statutes which he wished to repeal, he argued that the repeal of the law for inflicting capital punishment for horse, sheep. or cattle stealing, was unnecessary. England had flourished, and her agriculture ha i prospered, before 17411. when the law uow iu force had been framed. If it could be dispensed with in the two centuries which preced ed 1740, he wished to know what had made it necessary since that period. On offences of this description, he had to remark, that the executions, compared with the convictions, were as one to thirty. This he considered an encourage ' ...rut to crime, from the comparison which it invited, that the chv ces were thirty to one against punishment. Ile especially disapproved of enforcing these lows, and that to !millet arson with more or less severity, as crime chancel to be more or less prevalent in &particular district. He next came to the general resoletion which he wished to propose on the subject of forgery. This crime had been much re duced, nay, almost annihilated, by the restoration of the Currency. The Public owed this benefit to that measure. The numbers charged with forgery in Mel, amounted to one hundred and twenty-two; of these seventy-six had been convicted, and sixteen executed.—Last year, but six , ti-three persons had been charged with that crime, of whom I thirty-six were convicted and only six executed. Here was a reduction of one•half in the number charged and convict ei. and a still greater reduction in the number executed. Forgery on the Rank he regarded as a crime no longer in existence, end for private forgitedes, he thought the punish. meet of death was most unfit. He wished for the adoption of efficient secondary punishments, and congrstulated the House ou that which had lately been introduced into our prisons. With respect to secondary punishment, he differed from Mr. Roscoe. whose excellent pamphlet on this subject he had lately read ; and it seemed to him, that in proportion as he was anxious to diminish the number of capital felonies, that he was found to admit the propriety of inflicting serondary punish ments. He lamented the little importance which now attached to the passing sentence of death from the im pression that it would not be carried into execution.— The sentence was so little heeded that the whole form was regarded as a ridiculous solemnity. A Petiion for the revision of the criminal code presented to that House from Maidstone two years ago, had stated 43 to have received sentence of death in that town, of whom 41 were reprieved before the Judge took his departure. He condemned the indignities offered to the bodies of sui cides and traitors as being in fact no pnnishment but a mere exhibition of vindictive and brutal folly. He wished not to touch the confiscation of property in cases of treason, but lie was anxious that the forfeiture of goods atonal not follow suicide. That punishment he shewed fell on the innocent and not on the guilty. The indigni- 1 ties offered to the dead bodies of those who had last suf fered for treason, were performed by a man in a black mask, and he (Sir James Alacintosh) bed it from one who was present, that the multitude who attended ou that occasion broke out into no exclamations of anger and disapprubation till the man in the mask held up the bloody head, of the cnlpsita. This was the first time that the I sw of England bad been exercised in disguise. He doubted whether the treatment of a corpse where a ver dict of filo de se bad been retioned, was t ted by any law. It was not mentioned by Sir J. Hawkins, Sir M. H tie, Lord Coke, Stamford, or Fitzherbert—there was nothing in its favour with which be was acquainted but the uncorrohorated testimony of Blarkatone. The practice, however, it might be contended, though ob senre its origin had, from long custom, grown into a law; but then the question was whether or not that law ought to continue? If the practice of which he complain. ed were a punishment at all, it was a punishment not of the dead Fut the living, and a punishment indicted on the innocent, and that, too, without trial.— He objected to this law that verdicts offelo de se had seldom been given against persons of wealth. It was only in the cases of the poor and the friendless teat such verdicts had been returned. Ile blamed not the Juries for this, but he shewed the poor had not the same means of brining fora ard witnesses who could speak to the lunacy of the deceased, and from this he condemned the law as partial In its operation. The punishments of which lie me. ;stained were repugnant to public feeling and calculated to produce any effect but that of uniting them in support of the law. lie knew that some persona thought public opinion ought not to he regarded, when they were legis lating for the nation; but, he contended, it had peculiar value and importance on a qeestion like this: for, if pub lic opinion were not favourable to this indiction of the punishment awarded by law, either the sentences would not he carried into execution, or, if executed, they would only make sympathy for the culprit. He cionld wish to make the law the representative of the feelings and con• sciences of the people, so that lie who offended against them should be placed in a state of moral solitude; and he desired that the punishments indicted under them 'Mould he of such a character, that none could regtrJ them as vindictive in their operation, or as originating to hardeees or near t. Ile moucluited by moving a atriug of Resolutions, declaring it to be expedient to take away the ptittoihment of death from cases of larceny is a shoo, in a dwelling-house, tor on a navigable river : to repeal certain parts of the atatute of the 9th Geo. 1., called the Black Act, with the exception of the enactments against firing a dwelling-house, and maliciously shooting; and, also to repeal certain other statutes, and to provide for taking amity the punishment of d-ash for forgery, the conliscatit'n of goods in Cits.'s of suicide, and the in dignities offered to the dead in cases of 'moue and high treason. Hr. Secretary PERI, said, the Home was calle I upon by a single voice to declare that the punishment o: :nth might not to be . intlicted in a variety of cases which it had hitherto been deemed necessary to punish capitally. To adopt the moti n before the House. wa's to atbrua all these important propo.itians, each of ;thigh was sufficiently important to claim their special attention. He therefore objected to the coarse taken by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in thus bringing the subject forward, Instead of moving for leave to bring in a Bill in such a case, which would afford an opportunity for discussion in its different stages. By affirming this Re solution, be should pronounce a distinct opinion on se veral important questions, while, by consenting to the introduction of a Bill, he did nothing of the kind. He called upon the Howse to reflect upon the aukward situation in which they would stand, if at once agreeing is these Resolutions, they should subseqnently feel it their duty to reject the Bills which were to be founded on them. He therefore objected to the form in which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had brought this sub ject under their consideration, though he was by no means hostile to the object which ha (Sir J. Macintosh) had in view. He had last year opposed the giving of a pledge on the part of the House to take into conshkr ation the state of the Crimin %I Laws early in the present Session. tie had objected to it as pall experience bad tanght him, th it to give such a pledge was int oevenient. When given he thought it ought to be punctually redeem. ed. He admitted that it was expedient to take latoconsi , deration the Criminal Code with a view of mitigating its rigour; and aduf tting this, it was not necessary for him to debate generally the proposition of the Honour , able an I Learned liantline so, who would do him the justice to admit. that at the very commencement of the Session, he (Mr. Secr tary Peel) had announced that he was prepared to state what were the views taken by his Majesty's Ministers of this question. As, how ever, the Hon. and Learned Gentlem in had hro right i forward in former Sessious, he (Mr. Secretary Peel) had by no means wished to take it out of his hands, though be had tol4 him he was willing to originate a proposition, but at the saute time content to wait for the I lots. and L.:tenni Gentleman to do so, and to give his assent if it met his ideas. The lion. and Learned Gent. greatly objected to the mentions being so few in cour,reri.on with the sentences passed. He (Mr. Secretary Peel) contended this mist be looked for witere a large discretionary power was given to the executive, and that such a discretionary power was desirable, he was prepared to assent. From 16115 to 1820 inclusive, thee, had been 63 convictions for arson, and only ;It executions. For maliciously shoot ing, stabbing, and p lisoning, with intent to kill, the convictions were 189, the executions &S. For hurglary, the convictions had exceeded 2,400. the executions were 229 ; and for rape, the convictions were S 9, the executions, 55. In these cases the discretionary power intrusted to Government had been exercised. Of the necessity which existed for such power being lodged with them he had no doubt ; nothing had pressed it more forcibly on his his mind than the lett-r written by Mr. Burke in 1780, to Mr. Grey Cooper on the subject of certain capital punishments then about to take place. The case to which he alluded was that of the rioters, and in the letter which he had mentioned, it would be found that %Ir. Burke had put forth a variety of considerations, which in his judgment made it the duty of Ministers to ,interfere in casA which could not be provided for a priori by any law, and to select Irons the parties con victed tho , e who most deserved to suffer. Tim Hon. and Learned Gentleman hail indulged in surmises as to what a fureigne: must think of oar laws, icons the executions being so few compared with the sentences pronounced. A foreigner, and a person, no less eminent than M. Mon telquieu ha 1 expressed his sentiments on this subject. Ile was treating on the distinction to be made between roisherien, and robberies accompanied by murder or vio -1 lenee. 1n China lie stated all robberies to be punished by death, and the consequence was, most robberies were accompanied by murder, as the best means of guarding against convictioo of the robbery. In Aluseovy, he went on to say, a distinction was taken between rob beries committed according to the circumstances which accompanied theta, and it was found that these robberies were fretocnt, but murder was not. M. Montesqnieu remarked it was the same in England, as the rigour of the law was mitigated by the interposition of the Exe cutive, and such ioterposition, which he described as Lett rea de Grace," that distinguished wrier had main tained, was absolutely necessary under a moderate Monarchy. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman objected to the law being more or less rigorously enforced according to the circumstances of particular districts, but he (Air. Secretary Peel) defended the principle on which such a course was taken, as being that which was in fact the foundation of all law. It We, admitted by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman himself in the case of sheep-stealing, as he considered that to be an offence which must be put down with rigour, on account of the mischief which it occasioned. lie proceeded to inquire in what way the Penal Code could be best amended. The Right Honourable Secretary then adverted to the dirt rent classes of crimes which, a. cording to the statement of the lion. Gentleman, did not require capital punishment. With respwa to eight of the number, he was ready to remit capital punishment. Ile alluded to threatening letters, breaking down banks of rivers, and maliciously destroying cattle. Ile admitted that the law with respect to that class required al teration. lu the second class of offences, of which there were no less than 33, several had been provided for. Malls ciously cutting and destroying cattle was a most aggravated offence ; but he had no difficulty in saying it was open at lest to the taking away the capital. Oa the charge of ma liciously killing and maiming cattle only two executions had occurred in the course of sixteen years. Same difficulty generally arose in prosecutions on that charge, as it was ne cessary to prove malice against the owner of the cattle. The next offence was cutting down or destroying trees. In six years there had been two conviction., but only one execution. He was ready to make that offence subject to transportation for life. That punishment in ordinary cases would be found sufficient. Cutting down the banks of rivers, instead of death, might he subject to transportation. Cutting down the bank of a canal as the law stood was tran sportation, and he did not see why cutting down the bank of a river should be punished with more severity than cutting the bank of a canal. The offence of destroying the Bed ford level, might be under the same alteration as cut ting banks of rivers. The next offence was that of sending threatening letters, which was visited with more ity then sending letters to extort money. The latter was only subject to transportation. He beano objection to make both transportable offences. The punishment of death for personating out-pensioners of Greenwich Hospital might be altered. As the fraud was not on the pensioner but on Go verement, which might adopt the best mode of prevention, he should be ready to take off the capital. The same alter ation might apply to cutting of serges. Out of a class con sisting of 200 cases, he admitted the necessity for remission of capital punishment in 23 offences. Steeling lialfal stores he did not wish to have capital. Stealing ou navigable ri vers, appeared a Case for capital punishment, The proper. ty of persons on canals was as much exposed as on rivers, hut when Ito considered that persons having property of that description ought to employ active police, he was dis posed to give up the capital. Ilk should also remit e tpital punishment in stealing sheep. la the offence of stealing in the dwelling house to t3e ant tent of forty shillings lie was not dittos:red to take away capital puttis::nre”t. It oc curred to the Right Honours ale Secretary that the crime of stealing in the dwelling house, was distingni bed from others. Judge Blackstone said, " The Law of England has so much regard for the immunity of a man's house, that lie stiles it his castle." When be cost sidereal the depredations committed by servants on their employers, it was impoesible to contemplate a crime nits: e destructive of the interests of societe. In the case of forgery he was not disposed to make any alteration io sh e l a w. The crime since 18'.'.0 had been la• frequent. The prosecutions had diminished one-third. Before the Bank Cash-payinenc-st ail, the convictions for forgery amonnte.l to une hundred and seventy-nin... In 18.11 the member was only sixty-three, arid. in 1822, the num ber of enovictions amounted to six. That c ircittn , t ince was at least some consulaticia wising from the itch for pay mat', in mealliz car:tory. With respect to horse stealing and cattle Meeting, he could not assent to the proposition of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman. He was ready . to admit the Judges were placed under come Inconvenience from the necessity of passing rentence 1 1 on prisoners when that sentence was not to be carried into execution. It was hisintention to bring in a Bill to afford a remedy. He postponed all details on Vie subject until the proper time. Adverting to secondary punishment, he c insidered imprisonment on board the hulks likely to be a judicious mode of treating criminals, but as there are now three thousand onboard those receptscles,lit was not desirable to increase the number. The tread-mill was a Proper punithment for offences c.f minor description.— fhere was, however, Another set on tory punishment whit h might be adopted. P. eons in cone cases cast fur death siest he re it to hard lab me and expittiation. The Crown natght be emnowered to send out such convicts to be employed on publ c works abroad. In c ,se no co her Hon. Member introduced a Bill on the c'ihject, hr should bring in a Bill which he had ready. These were the ex periments he was ready to make, bet lie thought the House eduld not adopt the extensive smile of proceed ing propose] by the Hun. and Learned Gentlem tn. The way to retrace their steps regu!atly, was to move gradu ally. Ile oppdsed the motion, therefore should move the previous question; leaving the Hon. Gentleman to bring in Bills. He was prepared, to the extent he bad stated, to give him full and cordial support. • Mr. F. BUN lON stated, that the Menem of the hone alone prevented him from answeri ng at length the speech of his Right Honourable Friend. All be should then say was, that the speech disappointed him, and that the concessions it gave were no redemption of the recorded pledge of that flout With respect to the objection to the resuimion of capital punishment, on aecnunt of the frequency of private larcenies in dwelling-houses. the, very frequency of the offence on which his Hight lion. Friend rested his objection, was the strongest reason that could he urged for the mitigation of die capital pu nishment (hear, hear, hear!) Mr. SCARLErf differed from the last speaker as to the impression which the speech of the Right Poo. Secretary was calculated to make. He (51r. Scarlet° congratulated the House on finding that a Minister, fitt ing the high office he so worthily filled, not alone con ceded the principle, but declared himself prepared to ori ginate a series of measures in conformity with that prin ciple. It was some consolation and triumph to the friends of Sir Samuel Romilly to find that what was de nied to him in his lifetime, was now about to be carried into effect, even by those who had so frequently resisted him (hear, hear!)) • Tue ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed, that those !sweeping Resolutions of his Hon. and Learned Fri•Et (Siriames Macintosh) would be ioefficieut to their pro posed object. How did lie propose to meet the case of , larceny in cottages left unprotected in the day time, to which the existing law affixed a capital r unisti Itient He complainati that his Hon. and Learned Friend had taken the Noose by surprise in not having stated inv.': ously the specific nature of his motion eveu to his frieta. The Home, he thought, wou1•1 require sumo no:icos before they would consent to a lopt Resolutions, rapt of them involving laws that would require sep Irate di;- cessions. Mr. it. NIARTiN begged leave to snzgest to his Hoe. and Learned Friend, that if it teas his intention to follow. up his Resolutions wit'. Bills, it would be injudicious to risk the fate of those Bills by pressini the Resolutions to a division. Many persons who would vote against tido Resolutions might vote for every one of the Bills. It, however, his Hon and Learned Friend persisted in divi.t ing the House, he wodld vote with him. Sir J. HACI\TOiIi said in reply, that he 1,1)411 trespass bat a few umlaute, to explain the part which hs should take with respect to the Resolutions. He agreed with his Hon. and Learned Friend, in rejoicing that the principles of his late lamented and Learoeit mend (Str S. Rousilly) had beeo adopted to any extent, but he would have rejoiced still more if they had been adopted more extensively, for, with the exception of one Bill, the whole appeared to him to be a delusion. The con duct of his Majesty's Ministers upon this subject r-- minded him of an expression of a Friend of his with respect to another person, that he was a great friend *to general principles, but had a particular exception to the adoption of any one. With respect to the first Resolo tion, he would ask how often ba I the House of COMM :Pill voted for the very measure to which it pointed? Wotild the Right Hon. Gentleman advise the (louse to Imo s wit it it had done, to retrace its steps, and forfeit its pledge to the country? In proposing the Resolutions, he only wishe I to take the sense of the House in a in, pular way. The question was precisely the same as if he had moved for le lee to brin; in a Bill ; at toe atinos', it only went to add another stage to its progress, and it was absurd to talk of sash a thing as an irrevocable stage, the Bill being as liable to be thrown oat in one stage as In an Aber. He should certainly persist in vitt ing the sense of the House upon his first Wisolution, and would afterwards move the others, if that should helot', merely for the purpose of having them inserted in the Journals:— The House then divided on the first Resolution. For the motion, 76—Against it, 86—Majority 10. The remaining resolutions were negatived without a division. hl r. R. MARTIN moved for leave to bring in a Bill to prohibit ball baiting and dog fighting. Mr. BROUGHAM said, that he was a friend to the . principle of any measure calculated to pat an end to animal or human sufferings; but it was an objection to the present Bill that it did not go far enough. It aimed at the prevention of sports which formed the amusement of the lower orders, but did not interfere with those i:t which the more wealthy and powerful classes indulged.— He would ask whether fishing, grouse shooting, liars hunting, fox hunting, horse racing, and other diversions, of the same kin I, were not to the fall as cruel as 'ha against which the bill was levelled? Unless the 0..1 was amended so as to include both, be would object t j .any measure founded on a distinction between the lower and more powerful classes of his Majesty's subjects. As be said tbat no attempt was made to interfere with tuts a:notsetnents of the rich, he would oppose the bill in it 4 first stage, and in every stag., 'f necessary. ' Mr. R. MARLIN Observed, that the argument of the Honourable and Learned Gentlsman was mast absurd. It was as much as to say, if five hundred persons were cast upon a desolate rocit, because he could nut save the-3 all, they should all he drowned. Mr.811.01.101111i and Mr.M ARTIE mutually explainetl. Mr. PEEL objected to the H.ll as an unfit subject for Le gislation. Mr. J. smini said, that be would vote for the motion of hoz lionoureale Friend, so far as it related to dog tig:.t lag t of a brutal nature, which was vety much indulg ed in. Mr. W. SMITH declared himself in favour of the Bin, and denied that such sports had any tendency to keep up toe manly character of N.e lower classes. They were practised by the worst deseriptlen of persons, and not by those who hid any character to reeiommend them, and their ottsious •consequence was to iutroduZ., cruelty not courage. Sir. W. RIDLEY thought moth subjects were beneath legislation. and denied the tethlenky of such sports to ex cite to cruelty. He bad himself attended them frequently i early life, is id did not feel that they bad hardened his feel ings. Mr. BUXTON expressed a hope that his Honourable Friend would nut be prevailed upon to withdraw his motion. The same arguments hud been rrge: nrtiust his former 8.D., tau erects of which were. found to be so salutary. -Arta the tendency of-et= sports, he could state the. case of a buy, wito,frOut attending at doa lights. and mixing with the to- Clety there, became p rrrrr ten iu character, and lost to eNrry useful purpose id society. Ne wts less fortunate than :t.e Hooour.ible Ountlenian fur hie murals were cur -1 , I 1 *I