The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser. — London, England, 1810-05-02 00:00:00

ureic) , of u,.e was the object of all laws, and intimidation was the 'Beaus; for punishment was indicted only for the purpose of producing intuni• demi'. His lion. and Learned Friend had also ob. that-where thirty men were convicted of the pros crime, and only three of them executed, that the law WAS useless as to the twenty-seven.— Why, he WU.; suprised how amon could work him self up into such a confusion of arguateut. What, was the terror of the law nothing ? Did nut the executioo of the three midate the others, and thereby prevent the commission of crime? The whole of this question turned upon one considera tion, whither, instead of the system we now have, w hereby the terror is general, and the puuishineet restricted, from the exercise of discretiou in the exe cation of the law, another could be adopted, where the law could be executed invariably sod inflexibly. To accomplish this object, re course ought to he had to definition, und it might be extremely difficult to define, where the descrip tion was unavoidably general. Things, when token iielividually, might be distinguished, but that would wet be describing the species, for a description of the species, w hich would be su ffi cient for knowing the kind, wherever it was to he found, would not en able us to do the same individually. A circle, when presented to the eye, was obvious, so was an elipsis, an oblong, and every other figure differing Irons is straight line. lint under n general description of obese fignres, it would he dillieelt to distinguish others, is hick approached to several, and did Out belong to either; end yet, when they came before a person, he might know them ; at the untie time he would find it by no means easy to de fine or describe them. He might know the dif ference of indieul nal periwig when before him, from a variety of circutustaisees; their tallness, their In nis thin, or being fat; but how to lay down the proportion of these qualities would not be very easy, so as to give definition. So with respect to other animals, the same difficulty would exist in attempting a definition of them individually. How would his lion. Friend describe homicide I . To be sure a distinction might easily he drawn between excusable homicide and murder. Every one per ceived a difference between the act of a man who tilled another for his parse, or way-laid him through revenge,.and that of a man who accidentally, or jus.. tifiably took away his fellow-creature's life. But how would his Honourable Friend distinguish in some eases of manalaughter. which ho called justifiable murder? Suppose he (Mr. W.) were asked, whe ther, in the case of two men who had been toge ther in a public house, and in the course of their conversation had quarrelled, when one of them, neatly provoked, took up the pewter pot and killed the other, would that be murder or man- slaughter? He could not say ; he could not answer such a question without knowing sLeeiramititaanees. He remens tered an instance, some years ago, where a man Ming provoked in a shop, immediately went over the way, and returned with a knife, and then swore, that if any one provoked him as before, be would run the knife into them. They quar relled again, iknd he did stab the other in the belly, and his lioWils came out: Hoe would that be? Why, hi felt at the time, and he knew now what his nptuiou would have been ; but, if lie recollected tight, the Jury acquitted him. Bat the whole of these. and all other cases, inert rest upon the cir cumstances Which attended them. If the system of definition were introdnced, a single hair might save the offender. A great deal had been said of cruelty ; bat that, like crimes, could only be pu nished according to circumstances; and his Ho nourable Fnend wns one of those who intruded to ',import a law being made to punish cruelty. — This was a kiod of anomaly in his conduct, for these it was intended there should be nothing like definition; indeed it was a subject which did not admit the least definition, but was to affect the lower orders only, and be left to arbitrary decision. h is Honourable Friend was therefore at variance with himself and the doctrine of his present argu ment. To have precise definition was impassible ; the questioti must still be left to juries, it was im possible to work by machines entirely; there were machinct in this town to make pens, and yet they did not mike good prim: nor could they cause the law to operate perfectly, it would be found an incompetent machine. it was an erroneous eon eeptiti if any OUR supposed Dr. Paley had un dertaken to defend all the laws of this country, nor did he himself intend to advance any suds propo sition. But he would again assert, crimes might he very well described as they fell under tacertain species; but when they came to be individually considered, they might be widely different. They might so far differ, that no description would de fine, for often the common definitions were only founded upon comparison, and so it might be said of his drawing a long or a short straw. He was induced to behold all plans of innovation with cousideralde jealousy. In these times he lilt more inclined to do so. He did not men any disrespect to the name of his Honourable Friend, or that of oily other person.. He knew no names ; bat he under.tood there was a society e•taldished for the purpose of doing away capital punishments. In observing upon this subject, he might be thought-int...1...A1M with the principles he had imhilied in consequence of the French revolu tion. Indeed lie was full of that revolution; for it was above them, and beneath them; it was without them, and within them, and every where around then. lie could not but recollect, the French entertained these . plans; there was a society in that country, for the purpose of doing away ca pita! punishments; but they began by putting their King to death.—(A latigh.).—They. perhaps, determined dpon that transaction as the Agate of their former codes of criminal jurisprudence. He roust 4004 he entertained cousidentble suspicion of all societies in this country, who attempted innovations and improvements of the laws of the land. This system was intended to over turn that of Dr. Paley ; but he trusted the Hosea would pause before they permitted so con siderable an alteration. In .respect to the num ber of Penal Laws, that circumstance did net prove *tie severity, for, tinder the prerent system, the punishoienis might he few, as Dr. Johnson well ob,erred in Scotland, alien some one, to convince him of the cheat pnesti of eggsowid, there were no many fora penny," that was not conclusive of their being rhe api for though eggs might be many, pen. e VIE ght few." The Right Hon. Gentleman con- eluded by apologizing to the Houle rot taking up 90 much of their Clone ; but he lied been led to state his sentiments upon this subject, because he had I termed his opinion in deference to those who were of all others perhaps most competent to joke of the expediency of this measure, he ineaut the Judges; and he believed the whole of them disap proved oldie alteration intended by his Honourable Friend, in the Criminal Law of the land. The MASTEIL of the RuLts said, thst the object of the repeal of those laws was ct rt only most de sirable. The question to be considered was, whe- ther the means of attaining that object would be efficacious ? Nobody could deny what had been as ted by an Ilan. Gentleinan on the opposite side, (Mr. Windham), namely, that capital punishment was very seldou► inflicted fur the commission of those crimes, the law respecting which occupied their present consideration. Ile considered this as a strong proof of the error, either of the law, or the practice; and one of those must be inherently wrong; whether they were both is, would after o Kr& appear. He conceived that the unfre quency of inflicting the extreme punishment, was certainly a practice of most commend able nature. if the Judge dispensed with the law which commanded tt.e►r infliction, it was a breach of duty of which neither Mouse coruplaitred; and which would appear, on the contrary, to be countenanced by such authorities; the practice then ►hould be considered most beneticial, it wa. garded as such by the public, whom opinion re specting the law was very different ; they looked upon the law as most seriously erroneous. So much of the execution of the law depended upon the people, that their concurrence in the propriety, or repugnance to the existence of the law. should be the chief considerations attending the discussion of the present subject. Juries were selected from the people and not from the Judges, and they were to decide upon the guilt or innocence of the ac cused ; their opinions, therefore, with respect to criminal law, were those to which the must serious attentien should be given. If the law titer:fore was not approved of by those upon whom its execution depended, the consequence would be, that there wmilit be no •xecution„of the lax at all. But there appeared t.r he •at g•tderal, vett federney against those la“e, for the Juicy took care in their sirch. i to ex;:lude the cvit:ii .part of the punishaguit, for the crimes to winch those laws alluded ; or if the Judges conc.ltved that the infliction of the extreme punirtitnent was very unfit, and moderated their sentence Jeeordingly, the King's Witmen also acquiesced in U. too great severity of such a pianishinent for such offences.— It would be well if the mode of intimt.lation whit it had been said the present laws field.ot„ would be efficacious io preventiiii.; crime ; it would then be advisable to continue those laws in their primitive utichangeuble state ; but such an effect couktnever attend such a iueasure. He wished to know whetlwt it was the opinion of Gentlemen that the laws should b. so framed, that men should either get rid of them-, or their con sciences, by adhering to cleats Lie concluded by observing, that a law was efficaitious in proportion to its certainty ; where uncertaitity was increased, efficacy was diminished. Ti.. object of the repeal of these laws was the substitution of those which would more effectually prevent crime. 'the punishment to be indicted, in conformity to the present laws, for crimes, compared with that punishment, most trivial, was death, which should either be entirely remitted or put into execution; the remission or the ex.-cution would be attended with most mani fest disadvantages. Here there was a remedy to be applied to this great error in the laws. lie conceiv, ed that both the law and the praCtice required al teration. He would agree to the bills of his Hon. Friend, because his experiment was one which might he very fairly tried, end carried along with a high probability of success. The Arroavart-Gsosast. said, he could not agree in the opinion, that the exigence of the pre sent laws prevented the prosecution of offenders ; neither prosecutors, witnesses, or juries, were under the influence of intimidation, or were obstructed in their designs of bringing a criminal to justice. by the fear of the execution of a punishment open the guilty, too severe and sanguinary. Many offenders had been executed, in consequence of committing crimes, of the nature to which these laws referred ; their punishineat was proportioned to their crime. Many, also, who hail been found guilty, were, with equal propriety, sentenced to suffer ponishinents of less severity ' • but, by the power of intimidation, many mischiefs were prevented. The innumera ble instances of the efficacy of terror, in preventing crime, were tint visible to the eve, and were there fore accounted inconsiderable. With regard to the privately stealing in a dwelling-house to the value of forty shillings, he did not conceive that it was always necessary to inflict capital punishment for the commission of such an offence. lie knew that many deserved to suffer the severest punish ment, who bad entered, by force, the cottage of the indigent labourer, and deprived him of the means of subsistence, and plunged his family logo extreme poverty. When he found a law in exist ence, he always looked to its nature and efficacy in remedying evils. if no evil could b: pointed out in the law as at present administered, it ought not to be altered for the sake of mere speculation. lie had formerly practised in the Courts of Criminal Justice, and hall sat on the Bench,l'hut, during his experience, he had never known an instance arson. which the Jury bad been deterred, by the consideration of the severity of the punish ment which would follow • verdict of convic tion. He had certainly heard that prosecutors had through humanity iuterfered for the pardon of the convicted; lint rto such thing had occurred within his knowledge, as the perjury either of wit ness or juryman, from the circumstances of the pious panic which had been ascribed to them. But who were those by whom the laws could be most clearly expounued, by whom their effects could be mast satisfactorily ascertained ? Certainly those Judges who had been in the constant habit of dispensing; justice; who had before their eye, every day, the consequences resulting from those laws. The ques tion before the. House was one of most grave im portance. and contained so great a portion of the lass of the realm; that the most mature delibe ration should be given to it. He would ask those who cued out a! , diust the great severity of the I pcmishoseutss whether they were not aware that there were minor punishments, and whether those punishments were not most frequently substituted in the piece of extreme? What was to he acquired by the repeal of those laws ? The power of trans po►tetion ? Why that power existed. The power of substituting any other punishment ? That also ex isted. Why thim should those laws be repealed, if nothing was to be gained by the repeal, lint that which would appear beautiful to the eye ? He dis claimed the idea of agreeing with the proposal of such a speculation. Ile therefore gave his opposition to the Bills. Mr. Mosaic said, that he had been in the habit of attending the Courts of Criminal Justice; and hail seen, that not only the witnesses, but the jury, were guilty of perjury, for the purpose of saving the prisoner from the punishment to which his conviction would have doomed him. It would ...—.. - be unnecessary to state the consequences, ii such a relaxation of the laws were allowed. He would ad- mit such pious perjury, such amiable weakness in private life, hut he could not alloy► it to creep into the Courts of 3ititice. The Attorney-General had • spoken to the feelings of the House,• in draw ing a picture of the sutierins of the cottvger from depredations; but the circumstance was by un means relevant to the question before the House.—The crime of breaking into a cottage and plundering therein, was not connected with the ease of privately stealing. He considered the fal.e oaths, which were taken upon the occasions to winch he alluded, were au evil sufficient touccasiou the repeal of these laws. _ _ • The ArroaNEY.Geseast. explained. Mr. Fassixt.sgu said, that if thoss laws were so notoriously incompetent, lie woutlered . that Magistrates (lid not come forward und labotir fur the removal of them. Why did they not say, ae have seen many melancholy instances, where the prosecutor and the witnesses, in a case of criminal prosecution, were guilty of perjury, ami commit ted the crime for the purpose of saving the life of the accused. No such complaint as this was made; *lathe contrary, the first law opinions in the king dom appealed to be unanimous in their sentiment. with respect to it. luthis new system, there were l new punishments, as it was said, ejusdeas giroteris; this was considered as an argument of unanswer able weight in favour of the repeal, but it was out, the nature and weight of which he could unt see. The military•code, all over the earth, Was a power of inflicting the extreme punish ment, or any other that the Court thought tit ; and how many deserters were punished with death? Not one out of ten thousand. The Criminal Laws of this country resembled the alp.ve ; for the power of punishing in another wan ner thin by taking away life, was possessed by the Courts where those offences weie tried. Was it in cumbent upon those Courts, because they had the power of punishing with death, to execute that power upon all occasions? A man walked along the suburbs, and sat*, in the window of a horse, a blundeibuss and a rattle ; if hr asked the owner. upon seeing those instruments, how many men had hr killed ? and the owner replied, l never used the blunderbuss in my life ; was he, therefore, to put it in the tire? The system of laws no;' in existence was as well calculated as any that could he devised for the prevention or the punishment of crime; if the other system was carried, the manners and the practices of the country should undergo a tote!. change. In this country there was more tentptation fur the commission of theft than in any other; tied, of course, a greater necessity to guard 'Oust it. In other countries the hand was watched while it was acting ; in this, the systeM ivie, happy tOVITs liherty, completely - diffeteat. Should the mode observed in other couutries be adopted, and the police be let in upon the amusements and guities of England ? He had been where an armed man came into ii ball room, observed the 1 particular manners of tae dancers, and if he Paw any thing displeasing to him in the motions of the company, he would insist upon their turning partners in a different manner. Nothing would be so pernicious as the nitroduction'of a system of this kind. Where there was little pre ventive ,there should be much penal law. If this sy.tein was adopted, the commercial system, the manners, the lofty sprit, and the liberties of the country, would be de.troyed. Mr. WILBERFORCE said, that his Hon. Friend (Mr. Frankland) had been argots); against • sys tem which was never intended to be introduced by bis lion. and Learned Friend (Sir Semite' Homilly) who had introduced the Bill into the Home. He ought to have considered the subject more fully be fore tie attempted to give en opinion ; he scold find that, from the - reign of Queen Elizabeth, capital punishmer.is had ibminished at least three fourths. In great cities, crimes were more twine roils than in country towns; at least they lied the appearance of it; for the police were more active, and a greater number of persons were brought to trial. We have gradually opened our eyes to the Penal Laws of - the country, and every marl of • discerning mind must acknowledge that capital punishments ought to decrease. He called on them also to look to mirror punishments and of fences. Often was s a MOO imprisoned Inc a small offence, and when associated. he came opt a greater criminal than when first sentenced ; and as the law now stood,on a second indictment, the Jury would convict,and the Judges senteace foe a crime, which, by a former eenteuee, they had educated him to. Suppose amen for the protection of his house had a blunderbuss loaded, and a rattle affixed to his dow, one to give alarm, and the other to oppose the invaders. would it not be more laudable to spring the rattle arid alarm his neighbours, than to tire off the blunderbuss. without knowing the intention of his assailant ? Could say man couscieutiouely say. that the alarm was not the best mode? lie had given this subj.et full consideration, and had come to the conclusion, that it was necemary the penal laws should be revised. The force of the arguments of the • Hon. and Learned Gentleman who brought the bill before them, were of that kind that must convince every rational man of the good the measure would produce. Ile thai.ked him fur having brought it forward; his great mind alone could have been capable of comprehending so great • benefit, not only to the country hot to the community at large. He felt hurt that the efforts of the Hon. met Learned tivaleman (Sir Samuel Rornilly), had not met the support which they so much deserved. lie felt it au IIOCUIBbOBI duty on . . Parliament, that, as the country increased . cm.. lizatiou, the laws should become more lenient. Under those considerations,tbe Bill should have his full support. The SoLimes-omgal. said, that, froM the arguments that bad bleu used, it would Be'stip posed that the Act of the 19th of the present Slag had been repealed. It . provided and made a dis tinction between the profligate criminal and the one who was new to rite. This Act might not be enforced. yet it was not a dead letter: and the latter criminal was entitled to private imprison latent, where, by his reflectiob, he would be enabled to purge his mind, and collie out pure. He knew it from actual experience, at the place he first made his academical debut. It was carried into execu tion ; and the man confined, and afterwards ace gulped, did not feel the leaSt deprivation of dia. racter. It had been found, that transporting fe lons had been a great evil •to the country, and imprisoning them for a limited time was more in jurious. When a law remained on their books, which would answer every thing' proposed - by the measure under discussion, he could out vote for it ; for allowing that it would be right that it should be carried, it would take a length of time to put it into execution. That the stealing in the duelling-' know to the amount of 40s. Should he a capital • punishment, he acknowledged had at one time staggered him but he had conferred with profes aioual men, and found their sentiments quite dii ferent from the arguments of the lion. and Learned Mover, (Sir 8. lierailly,) that prosecutors were deterred from prosecuting, for fear the of tenders would be liable to capital punishment. lie own entered largely into the enormity of the r:r4,ne of a mates imuse being broken into; and ur4oe,l, that no punishment could be too great for tie malefactor who attempted it, or carried it iii:n execution. (Cries of Hear, hear./ He would piave, that, although he thought the atrocity of house-breaking so great, that no punishment could he too severe far it ; yet those who were of a dif.. fereut opiniou, might prosecute a ithout making it capital, by leaving out in the indictment, the words .4 in the dwelling-house." Under all those considerations, he would give his decisive negative to the bill then under their discussion. Mr. CANNINii stated, that he trusted the vote which he should give that night, would not be supposed to be influenced by the arguments of the 11311. and Learned Gentleman who had just sat down ; in his (Mr. Ca ttttt nes) opinion, he had argued the different points too widely ; for he could not held that the system should be the • same, however times might alter. if the Hoti.:• and Learned Gentleman who brought forward the present Bill, bud introduced a sweeping measure, to do away the whole code of Penal Law*, the ar guments of the lion. and Learned Solicitor-General aught be relevant ; but, in the present ivistwoces they were completely irrtle vent. The Dill pro. posed what was DOE only justifiable, but Practil cable. It only went to diminish a discretionary power„„ which was then vested in the Judges. This the Learned Gentleman would argue was doing nue . thing ; but he would contend, it was doing a vast 'bill, fur it was putting the life of man out of the discretion of his fellow-man.—( Aar, hear./ To the ill-regulated mind, the fear of an ignotni• lIIOUS death might Sot deter the person in posses sion of it from committing enact whicifdwierveti the punishment ; but to the well-regulated mind. it would operate -differently. It would prevetlt hint from probecaiting the culprit, for fear he 'night be punished with death. The country gained nothing by transporting ; he would rather it should lose, so as the life of a subject was preserved. He was nut desirous to grant a boon to the eulprit ; so far front it, he wished him to be punished ; and, Whin con. milting the crime, that he should know there were not any means of escaping that salutary chastise ment. There was one question, Villich practical' turn were not the best judges of, which was p the mode of leaving it in the power of jaries' to say that au article stolen, although proved to he of a greater value than 41 s. vet they should return it guilty of stealing to the amount of J9s." It was a perjury that ought to be pre. vented ; and if there HAS one that the Omnipotent Power could forgive, this was one ; for if perjury could be amiable:in this feature alone it must be. Perhaps perjury was too harsh a name for it. It was mixed with mercy, and those refined genii... means that brought this, country to its piesent ch. vilizatiou. It *hewed that 'Englishmen would do a little wrong to attempt .the reformation of a fel low-subject. If it was a crime, it was of that nature, the seraphs of heaven would look down on earth, and, with • smile, erase the blot. lie con tended, that however light the crime might be, yet Juries ought not to be put in the situation of being enforced into any. The bill before them provided against that law in the Penal Cotle, for which reason he thought it ought to be adopted. (Hear! hear 11 They should •pproximaie t as nearly as possible, to what was perfect, though they could not expect to accomplish it. Of dime who were committed, it was evident that but few were punished ; which was • proof that there was something wrong. It was right, therefore, to lessen the scale, in order to insure the enforcement of punishment. Such an attempt was not, as it had been termed, innovation ;—it was revision and improvement. As to the danger of this Bill leading to a greet and universal change in the criminal jurisprudence of the country, he most say, that he did not feel himself pledged by his vote 'iron that night, to touch the hair of the Lead of soy other law ; he only meant to give his vote on the narrow question now before theta. The CHANCELLOR Of the EICHIMUCIL said, that, after the able argume n ts which had been already urged, he should not trespass long, upon their time. lie could not agree in the criticism of his Right Hon. Friend upon that part of the Solicitor-Gene ral's speech which expressed an apprehension of innovation. for such was to be dreaded, If, without sufficient ground, they voted for the present Bill. The question simply wes, whether it would have a tendency to lessen clime ? If it had, he thought thew should vote foe it; but if it had not, ' no other surprised practie ground could Judd'' , their support. He was. to hear hss Right Flom Friend say,thistsillthe eel authorities were so b.ilstsced, that he 'night take his owo judgment. What was the feet with reaps et to those authorities ? The fact was, that loot a ►iuylle Judge or %gooses had sleclared himself to favour .01 it. They were all against it, HI: laud uo btu-