The Sun. — London, England, 1857-02-10 00:00:00

sedges—by which term I mean the chairmen of quarter scions, recorders, and judges, including those in Scot land—and I remember no case in which ajudge informed me that he had passed a sentence with the expectation that it would not be carried into effect, or had given any intimation to a prisoner that he would be entitled to claim the remission of any portion of his sentence if he behaved well. (Hear, hear.) I made one reference to the Lord Justice Clerk of Scotland, a very distin guished judge, w ho wrote to me very fully expressing his opinion against the remission of any portion of the sentence, and informing me that he was authorised to state that the judges of the superior courts of Scotland hal passed no sentence of penal servitude except with the expectation that it would be fully carried into effect, as they understood to be the intention of Parliament. I have seen it stated publicly that, by some rule or regula tion of the Home-office, the intention of Parliament has been defeated by the restriction of tickets of leave to those convicts who were under sentence of transporta tiou in 1853, and the exclusion from their benefit of all persons since sentenced to that punishment. I am happy to be able to state that no such rule or regulation has been made. No one can now be sentenced to trans portation for less than 14 years ; and as this act has only been in operation three years and a half, no con vict sentenced to transportation since. it was passed can yet be in a position to claim a ticket of leave. All such persons must at present be undergoing preliminary im pritionment in some of our probationary establishments. It is obvious therefore that the system popularly called the ticket-of-leave system, and which I must say has given rise to exaggerated alarm, would, if things were to remain as they are, soon become almost extinct and hardly per ceptible. At least it would only have this effect, that there would be subject to it the balance of prisoners still remaining on hand who were under sentence of transper tation in 1853, together with a few exceptional cases of penal servitude convicts. Still, that I admit is no answer to the questions " What shall we do with our criminals?" and " What is the best kind of secondary punishinents to apply to them ?" Nor can it be expected to allay the apprehensions—to a certain extent web founded, although alio greatly exaggerated—which have been excited with regard to the retention in this country of prisoners who have been convicted of serious crimes, and who under the former system were sent abroad. The point as to tickets of leave has little or nothing to do with the; questiou, be cause whether a prisoner was at large upon a ticket of leave in 1856, or whether at the expiration of a sentence which cannet be prolonged bylaw hale discharged in 1857 or 1858, the effect is one and the same—he must either before or at the expiration of his sentence be discharged in this country ; and instead of finding himself in a new community, with ample opportnnities for obtain. ing honest employment, and with little temptation to evil,- he is thrown back among his old associates, has the greatest difficulty, perhaps, in getting work, both from the feeling entertained against persons who have -been convicted of crime, and from the numberless competitors he has to meet in the' labour market. 'These dangers may no doubt be overrated ; yet unquestionably they are of great magnitude ; and it is most desirable as far as possible to provide against them, in the interest both of the country at large and of the criminals themselves. This was very forcibly pointed out by Mr. Baron Bram well in his recent address to the grand jury of Essex, in which the learned judge remarked, without expressing any opinion whether tickets of leave are good or bad, that the real question is, w h a t becomes of the criminal after he is discharged, e it in this country or be it abroad ? (Hear.) I have said that I think the alarm on this - subject greatly exaggerated ; and, in tracing the effects of the act of 1863, I ought, perhaps, to say why I am of that opinion. Much has been written in the newspapers about the danger arising from ticket-of-leave men being at large in this country, and doubtless a great deal of what has been said is not intended to apply ex clusively to the holders of tickets of leave, but to persons who have either been in prison or have undergone sen tences of transportation and returned to this country after their legal discharge. That class no doubt forms a large portion of our criminal population ; it did so before 1853, it has done so since then, and I am afraid it must continue to do so. Nobody who looks at the reports of the trials at our sessions and assizes can fail to observe that in a great number of cases the prisoners are not charged for the first time, but have been convicted of repeated and habitual crimes. I obtained a return the other day of the number of ticket-of-leave holders convicted at the assizes held in 24 counties in December last. At those assizes 625 prisoners in all were tried, only 29 of whom, or less than 5 per cent., are returned as holders of tickets of leave. I do not say it i s not to be regretted that there should be even that num ber. What I maintain is that these figures do not justify the great apprehensions felt that all our crime is com mitted by ticket-of-leave men. But what is the general state of crime as disclo'ed by the returns for the last two years I At the close of the debate on the Address the other night, the right bon gentleman the member for Manchester (Mr. M. Gibson) spoke of a frightful in crease in pauperism and crime, but I did not then deem it necessary to comment on his observations, because I felt that I ghoul I have a fitting opportunity to state the facts of the case on the present occasion. Criminal tables, prepared by Mr. Redgrave, were laid before Par liament on the first day of the ses-riou, containing a very careful comparison and analysis of the crime in this country in the years 1854 and 1855. But what was the state of crime in 1856 as compared with 1855, the peried within which such loud cemplainte had been made t It must be remembered, too, that in the year 1356 the militia were disbanded, and the regular army con siderably reduced • and, although. the maj,rity of the s o ldiers who served the country abroad were doubtless well-conducted men, yet, when a large b)dy of persons from the ranks of the army were thrown again into civil life, you could not be altogether surprised if that step were followed by some addition to the statistics of crime, wholly irrespective of the discharge of prisoners upon tickets of leave. Such appears to have been the general impression judging fretu what one reads in the news papers. Now, doubtless there has been a considerable increase in a certain class of crimes, especially in those attended with violence. The returns for 1854 and 1855 are in the hands of hon. members ; and I trust they will avail themselves of the opportunity to ermine them. But there was a disturbing cause which it is necessary to take into account. In 1854 the passing of the Criminal Justice Act extended the summary jurisdiction of justices of the peace, and the consequence was a large in crease in the number of summary convictions within the next twelve months concurrently with a corre spending decree-4e in the cases tried at the assizes and sessions. Bat in 1855 and 1855 no such cause was in operation, the Criminal Justice Act being equal, in force daring both of those years. The foltowiog table gave the summary convictions and commitments for trial in 1856, contrasted with those for the previous year :—England and Wales.—Number of persons com mitted on summary convictions in 1856, 77,667 ; num ber of persons committed for trial at &seize . ; and sessions in 1816, 19,433 ;—total, 97,100 ; number of persons committed on summary convictions in 1955, 77,011 ; number of persons committed for trial at assizes and sessions in 1855, 25,972 ;—total, 103,013. Comparison of the commitments in 1856 and 1855 : —Summary convictions, 0.8 per cent. increase ; c.nia mitn.ents for trial, 25.1 per cent. ceor, a -e ;—total, 6 1 per cent. decrease. Thus, while there was but a small tractional increase in the Dumber of suunrrary convic tions in 1856 compared with 1855 there was a very re markable decrease, amounting to no less than 25 per cent. in the graver class of cases—viz., the commitments fur trial at the assizes and sessions. That is a state of things which I think does not justify all the alarm which has prevailed in the country in regard to the pro gress of crime. Burglary and other violent offences are comprised in this general aggregate, and it is also wor thy of note that the crime:of robbery, including, as it does, garotting, which is only one of the various modes resorted to for effecting robbery, has slightly decreased in 1856 as compared with 1855. If the right hon. member fer Manchester were present I should call his attention to the fact that the late chief constable of that city recently informed me that within the last three months there has beset areutarkable diminution of crime in Man chester. As the general condition of the people of this country is so closely connected with the state of crime, and as the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gibson) coupled pauperism and crime together perhaps I may also be per mitted to observe that the decrease o feriae which I have mentioned is attributable to a cause which has al ways a powerful effect on our prison returns. I hold in my hand a copy of the annual return, which will be laid oa tbs table by the President of the Poos-Law Board, showing the number of persons receiving parochial relief in England and Wales on the let of January, 1857, as compared with the Ist of January, 1856. This return comprises the 40 counties of England and all the coun ties of Wales, and I find that in seven counties only is there any increase in pauperism, and in some cases that increase is hardly - perceptible. In all the other counties there has been a decrease. In Lancashire_the diminution is 11 per cent. ; the same in Nottingham ' • and there has been a large decrease in Middlesex and the East and West Ridings of Yorkshire. In fact, in those counties where the population is most dense there has been a decrease in pauperism, and I believe also a large de crease in crime—at least, of that class of crime which is most affected by the condition of the people. I may remark that when the general condition of the people is good, when employment is plentiful, and food is cheap, then crimes against property which come under the head of larceny diminish, but cri mes of violence often increase, arising, as they do, from causes quite irrespective of the difficulties under which the poorer classes sometimes labour. Having said so mach as to facts, let me now refer to the state of the law. Sentences of transportation for 14 years or upwards may be passed, or, at the dis cretion of the Court, penal servitude may be substituted in lieu of the higher penalty ; but below periods of 14 years only sentences of penalservitudecan be pronounced. Sentences of penal servitude must be carried out at home, or in those colonies of the Crown where the con victs can be employed upon public works, as at Gibral tar and Bermuda, and every prjsoner sent to those places must be brought home again to this country either in anticipation of the expiration of his sentence, or when he has fully completed its term ; for, even were it legal to do so, there are political reasons against liberating con vane in those colonies. Now, of the 350 persons annu ally sentenced in Great Britain to transportation, after deduc ting women, with regard to whom there are now no means of Carrying out such a sentence, and also deducting the sick, th e old and those witblwor ' n-out constitutions, of whom ther e .; v ies: es , there will many to be found among the criminal robably be not more than 250 annu ity tu who under e r t tent state of the law could legally be transported from c e ountry, and even that number may be diminished by -- judge tn l e v ae u r i ci n se of the discretion that is vested in the last refer to the opinions of the committees which eat I year upon this subject. The committee of the House of C into that branch o f the sub j ect whicho r n e s la r ed tered c ad ministration of the l aw in to the chiefly We country. It received much valuable and usef ul evidence, and madeao im portant reoommendationa. T he commi t t ee of theTtouse of Lords took another course, and, although they ex amined Colonel Jebb as to the administration of the law in this country, they examined no other witness upon that point, but pursued its inquiries into the possibility of continuing and extending transportation, and of find ing ether places for the reception of convicts than Western Australia. There wae, however, a remarkable concurrence of opinion between the two committees as to the benefit to be derived from a continuance of the system of transportation to as great an trent as the Government could find means to apply it. (Heir, hear.) The committee of the House of Commons say— " Tl}atthe punishment of transportation is more effectual and deterring, better wlapted for the ultimate reformation of c onvicts, and more beneficial to this country thin any o ther secondary punishment for serious crimes which has yet been tried. That the committee therefore recommend the continuation of the sentence of transportation, so far as her Majesty's dominions may afford safe and proper facilities for that purpose." The committee of the House of Lords said— " That, in the opinion of the committee, a continuance of the system of transportation to some colony or colonies, with such improvements as experience has suggested, or may suggest, would be highly desirable, provided that the system can be carried on with advantage to the colony, and with satisfaction to the colonists." The two committees have concurred in the opinion, which I believe is shared by a majority of this house, that whe ther we consider the interests of the convicts themselves or the interests of the country, it is most desirable that before the expiration the sentence of offenders who have been guilty of grave crimes, those convicts should be re moved to another part of the world, where they would be freed from the temptations to a renewal of vicious courses, rend where there would be greater opportunities for com mencing a new and improved mode of life. (near.) In saying this, however, I cannot shut my eyes to the amazing difficulties which have lately sprung up in the way of car rying out the desire which all entertain—that, having punished men for committing crime, we should preserve them from a renewal of their evil practices by seeding them to countries where they:could commence a new course of life under better prospects than at home. In any opinion which I may express upon this subject, either now or here after, I beg it may be understood that the Government has not the remotest intention of departing from the spirit or letter of the arrangement which has been made, and I think wisely, that as regards Van Diemen's Land and the South Australian colonies, transportation has completely ceased. I hope it will not be imagined by any one that we have any intention of renewing that contest. now happily subsided, which raged at one time on the subject of trans portation to the colonies. The committees which sat last year have expressed themselves very clearly upon that point. The committee of the House of Commons qualified their recommendations by adding, "so far as her Majesty's dominions may afford safe and proper facilities for that purpose." The House of Lords not less distinctly said, "provided the system can be carried on with advantage to the colony and with satisfaction to the •colonists."e I hope,'. therefore, there will be no misapprehension upon this subject, or any idea that we are • about to force con victs upon unwilling colonies. I may here observe that among the many suggestions which have been made from time to time there have been several for the establishment of great penal depots at various places, such as Holyhead, Gibraltar, and elsewhere, where convicts during the period of their sentences could be usefully employed upon public works ; but those who made such suggestions are not aware of what was the real difficulty in the ques tion. There is no difficulty in disposing of convicts during the stages of their separate imprisonment or their labour upon public works; in fact, I am obliged to refuse the calls of my right hon. friend the First Lord of the Admiralty for convicts to work at Portland, Portsmouth, Chatham, and Gibraltar, simply beceuse there are not convicts enough undergoing their sentences for he public works upon which they may be usefully employed. The difficulty consists, not in finding places where they may be beneficially em ployed, but in finding places whither they may go after the completion of their sentences with some hopes and pros pects of reformation. It is the duty of the Government to avail itself of all the facilities which exist for that object, and I may venture to say it is the duty of Parliament to assist us in removing any obstacles which may stand in our way. The facilities which exist for transportation are these :—Western Australia is the only colony which will receive convicts under sentence of transportation. The house must bear in mind that I have shown that in future years 250 is the largest number of convicts which we can calculate upon being able to send abroad, owing to the small number of sentences of transportation which are now pronounced, and it must also bear in mind that those 250 have all been repeatedly convicted or con victed of serious offences. That is the stock in hand for future supply. What are the facilities for their disposal? The committees to which I have alluded took much valu able evidence respecting Western Australia. They exa mined witnesses long resident in the colony, men of pro perty in, and, what was more important, who were about to return to, the colony—those witnesses comprising Capt. Fitzgerald, the late governor, Messrs. Brown, Moore, Hume, &c. The colonists were anxious to have convicts that they might have the advantage of their labour. As to the nature and capabilities of the colony, the evidence showed that its extent was very large, and that it was, as yet, almost entirely separated from the other Australian colonies. It is described as a vast plain, with only three ports from which convicts could effect their escape, and there would be no difficulty in guarding against escapes from those ports. The climate is good, suitable for agri cultural pursuits; the country presents numerous tracts suitable for corn ; there is an excellent breed of horses, which are exported largely to India, being considered supe rior to other Australian horses ; there is an abundance of fine timber, and the land is suitable for the growth of the vine, which is already cultivated to a large extent. I be lieve the demand for convict labour arose in Western Aus tralia from very considerable grants of land being made to private individuals, who thought that land constituted wealth, whereas without labour land is perfcctly valueless. Now that convict labour is available these persons are able to turn the land to some account, and there is a general opinion expressed by these witnesses that oven under the present system without adopting the changes suggested by the House of I;ordsyfrom 800 to 1,000 convicts a-year might be received and usefully employed in Western Australia — probably more if measures were taken inviting capital and labour to the colony. In addition to this evidence given before the committee, representations have been made by a deputation of gentlemen connected with the colony to the Secretary of State that Western Australia possesses peculiar advantages for the reception of convicts, and that both proprietors and residents concur in the desire to have convicts sent. Sir J. PAKINGTON.—Have no representations been sent home the other way ? Sir G. GREY.—The (Ally representation the other way was a petition, which came last year while the committee was sitting, which complained not the', convicts were sent out from this country, but that a certain number recently sent were net selected with as much care as formerly, and that, instead of few crimes being committed, some of seri ous magnitude had been the result. The Lords' committee advert to that complaint, and recommend a return to the rrinciPle of selection, in order to send to Western Austra lia that class of convicts which will be most useful to the colony. This demand by Western Australia fc r convict labour is one which in the present state of the law the Go vsrement is unable to meet. Hera is a colony asking for from COO to 800 or 1,000 convicts a-year, and we have n more than 250, comprising that class against which excep tion was taken in the petition to which I have referred. trader these circumstances the question arose in the course of last year whether, under the sixth section of the act of 1853 persons sentenced to penal servitude could be sent to Western Australia. The terms of the act appear to be very large : " Evely person who under this act shall be sentenced or orde7cd to be kept in penal servitude may, during the term of the sentence or order, be confined in any such prison or place of confinement in any part of the united kingdom ' or in any river, port, or harbour of the united kingdom, in which persons under sentence or order of transportation may no.v by law be confined, or in any other prison in the united kingdom, or is say pert of her Majesty's dominions beyond the seas, or in any pert or harbour thereof, as one of her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State may from time to time direct; and such person may during such term be kept to hard labour and otherwise dealt with in all respects as persons sentenced to transportation may now by law be dealt with while so confined." The question was referred to the law officers of the Crown, and, after carefully considering it, they arrived at the con clusion that it was not competent fur the Government to avail themselves of Western Australia as a place where the sentence of penal servitude could be carried into effect. The fact is, such convicts would not be subject to the colo nial laws and ordinances, their labour could not be assigned to the governor of the colony, and they could not have a qualified liberty. Transportation would lose all its value, and it would be only sending convicts out to bring them back again before the expiration of their sentences at a great expense, without the slightest benefit to the colony. The Commons' committee, in their seventh resolution, re commended that the sentences of penal servitude should be lengthened to terms identical with the terms of transpor tation for which they were substituted. The Lords' com mittee, in their 12th resolution, recommended that the provisions of the act substituting penal servitude for trans portation should be revised. They did not specify with what object they should be revised, but I apprehend they, like the House of Commons, thought that the sentences of penal servitude should be lengthened, and made identic,l with the former sentences of transportation. The House of Commons state a ground for their recommendation—viz., to give effect to a previous resolution, that every punish ment should include a first period of imprisonment with hard labour, and a further period capable of being abridged by the good conduct of the convict himself ; and they sug gest that the present term of panel servitude should, as a , general rule, be inflicted, but that there should be super added, over and above the present term, anbject to miti gation, the difference between the present period of penal servitude and the former period of transportation for which it was substituted. They further recommend an in termediate period of pen a l serv it u d e . Wh en sen t ences o f seven years' transportation were passed there was a dis cretion in the judge, which now remains in cases of four years' penal servitude, to substitute a sentence of impri sonment alone—usually two years' imprisonment, instead of seven years' transportation. In recommending the in crease of the sentence of penal servitude to seven years the committee recommend that the discretion of the judge shall be enlarged, and that he shall be able to inflict a period of penal servitude longer than the imprisonment, but shorter than the transportation would have been under the old law. I come now to the proposals which I have to make on the part of the Government, as appearing to them to be the most expedient, after full consideration of the subject. We propose in the bill which I shall ask leave to introduce to give effect to the 7th resolution of the com mittee of the House of Commons recommending that sen tences of penal servitude shall be lengthened so as to be made identical with the sentences of transportation for which they were substituted. We also propose to give effect to the 9th resolution, giving discretion to the judge to pass an intermediate sentence between the ordinary term of imprisonment and the term of seven years' penal servi tude. The, first clause of the bill will repeal the provisions of the act of 1853, by which the shorter sentences of penal servitude were substituted for the longer sentences of trans portation, and rill render persons who may formerly have been sentenced to transportation liable to be kept in penal servitude for the same duration as the term of transporta tion for which they were liable before the act passed. There is then a proviso giving the discretion to the judge to pass a sentence of intermediate penal servitude, as I have already explained to the house. This will, I trust, provide a remedy for the evil complained of, and will en able us to avail ourselves of the facilities which still exist, and I trust will hereafter be enlarged, of removing persons convicted of serious crimes from this country. The effect of this alteration will be that the sentence of penal servi tude need not necessarily be carried out by the removal of the convict from this country, but if it be thus carried out the sentence will carry with it the same regulations to which convicts are now subject. I propose to take this power, and to make it generally applicable to all sentences of penal servitude, because is difficult to draw the line, and to say what persons shall be removed from this coun try and who shall not. I do not anticipate that this power will be exercised with regard to the greater portion of those sentences for short periods, and especially if these inter mediate sentences of penal servitude are passed I do not think theta will be the practice to remove from this country convicts sentenced to very short terms of imprisonment. As a rule I think it will not be expedient that prisoners should be sent to the colonies on very shed sentences. In other cases, when sent there, prisoners ought to be for a very considerable time subject to the control of a ticket of leave, and I do not make this proposal with the intention that it should be carried into effect before a portion of their sentences shall be passed in penal servitude. A very large portion of the sentences must be for seven years, and in a very large proportion of cases these prisoners will not be removed from this country. It is proposed to give that power of selection which the committee of the House of Loris think the essence of the system of transportation to Western Australia, an 1 which they recommend the Government to have recourse to. It would be necessery to consider in con nection with their crime and their sentence circumstances of which the judge could know nothing at the time—the age, the physical strength, and the pursuits of the convicts. To send convicts to the colonies who would crowd the labour market, and who are unfitted for labour by physical weak ness, age, ill-health, and other circumstances, would be to send those who woult,) be a burden to the colonies. This would be a course unwarranted by experience, while a contrary method would remove the objeetione which the colonists of Western Australia enter tain to the class of criminals from which they have hitherto been furnished. The power of selection will enable the Government to send a sufficient quantity of con victs to Western Australia or other colonies to which it might be determined to send them, and to avail themselves of additional facilities for the disposal of convicts without further alteration of the law. An objection may be made to the uncertainty of punishment in the sen tence for penal servitude, and it may be said that a con vict will not know whether he will find himself in this country or in a distant colony. (Hear.) But that objec tion has always applied to the sentence of transportation also, so that no convict sentenced to seven years' transpor tation was really sent out of the country. The judge may have depicted the horrors of being separated from his fa mily and friends and being sent to a distant colony, and the convict often went from the bar expecting that he would be transported to a distant country. But in three or four years it usually happened that the convict found himself again in his native village among his family and friends. For short sentences, therefore, it was impossible to carry the sentence of transportation into effect, and there was much uncertainty whether it would be carried into effect or not. Sir J. PAKINGTON—These sentences were put an end to on that account. Sir G. GREY—It was certainly impossible to carry a large number of the sentences of ttansp,rtation into effect, either from the physical incapacity of the convicts, or from other causes, and the right hon. gentleman cannot put his finger upon a single year in which a large number of con victs under sentence of transportation were not retained permanently in this country. It is also to be remarked that the sentences of penal servitude can be carried into effect whether the convicts serve their sentences at home or abroad, while an actual deportation from this country is the very essence of a sentence of transportation. The committee recommend that a certain number of prisoners should be sent to Bermuda and Gibraltar to serve their sentences of transportation, and they say that it is neces sary that the public works should be performed in those colonies by convict labour. With regard to the course pursued the sentence passed upon these convicts amounted to a qualified sentence of deportation. The convicts were sentenced by the judges, and then, not by the decision of the Government, a certain number were sent to Ber muda and Gibraltar, and remained in those colonies to undergo their sentences. A further objection would be the great anomaly which would remain if the bill stopped here. If it were left to the discretion of the Government to remove convicts sentenced to penal servitude, it would be a great anomaly to continue to pass sentences of transportation above 11 years. At present these sentences need not be passed at all, and the judges may pass sentences of penal servitude for the same term. It may be urged that there is no reason why we should retain the sentence of transpor tation for 11 years. Why should the judges have a discre tion in the one case and not in the other ? The judge has no knowledge whether the sentence will be carried into effect or not. A man stands before him, and he has no safe guide to enable him to exercise a sound discretion, or to say whether the prisoner is a fit person for the labour of a colony. I propose, therefore, to abolish the sentence of transportation altogether, and to substitute the sentence of penal servitude for it. I now come to the sth resolution of the House of Commons, which recommends that sentences should not be carried into effect whore convicts considered themselves entitled to their partial remission. I have been asked by many persons to extend these remissions to those under sentence of penal servitude. I replied that I would not do so, because I did not want Parliament to be ham pered and fettered in the consideration of this question. I thought if I held out any expectation of a remission of these sentences I should be told that we were breaking faith with these prisoners. No prisoner under sentence of penal servitude, except in a few special cases, has had any expectations held out to him of a remission of any portion of his punishment, and Parliament ie, therefore, at liberty to deal with these persons as it thinks best. I admit that the resolution of the committee is founded upon the evi dence of witnesses of great weight. Some of the judges are also of opinion that it is desirable to give a stimulus to hope, and to hold out the prospect of a remission of a portion of the sentence as a reward to good conduct. In that principle I must say I, in a great degree, concur. (Hear, hear.) It may, however, be carried too far in sentences of transportation. In 1853 it might be neces sary, in consequence of the peculiar circumstances of the time, and as an experiment, to bold out hopes of a remis sion of punishment. I think it will be found desirable that the principle of this recommen lation should be acted upon. No doubt it is the best way of maintaining prison discipline. Hope is a more influential motive than tho fear of punishment, and this principle ought, I think, to be acted upon if the sentences are for lengthened periods. I am also of opinion that persons who are to be sent out of the country ought to undergo some months of separate punishment before they leave this country. It has been said that a certain portion of those who may be advanta geously sent to Western Australia should be sent either with tickets-of-leave, to take effect shortly after their arri val, or with the expectation of receiving a ticket-of-leave after their arrival in Western Australia. Captain Hen derson has expressed a strong opinion, in which I concur, that the greatest value may be expected from the training which the convict receives in England, but he recommen , es that a part of the strictly penal sentence ought to be passed in the colony to which he is sent. The real difficulty is its to those who are left at home. (Hear, hear.) I propose with regard to them that the same principle shall be adopted. There are some persons who commit crimes of such atrocity, or who are guilty of such gross misconduct in prison, that they come under the denomination of incor rigible. This class have no claim to any indulgence, and ought not to be inflicted on a colony. They really almost belong to the class of criminal lunatics, who have commit ted some great crime, for which they have been imprisoned for life, not as a punishment for an offence for which they are not responsible, but to secure society against a repe tition of that offence. With regard to the other and 1 far more numerous portion of criminals, no doubt the more we can send abroad the better ; but some must be kept at home, and we propose to retain the power of remitting a portion of their sentences. Two questions were raise r before the committee in connection with such a remission—first, what should be its amount ; secondly, whet should be its terms and conditions? It ought, no doubt, to be considerably shorter in amount than the mi nimum fixed in the case of convicts under sentence of trans portation. A great dral of the outcry whicsoh' has been -raised against the system of discharging priners w licenses has been caused by the large remissions of sen tences which have taken place; great irritation has been produced in many neighbourhoods by seeing a man who had been sentenced to perhaps 15 years' transportation re turn at the expiration of four years; and some of the judges of the land have felt a certain amount of annoyance at being obliged to try prisoners upon whom they had al ready passed sentences which, if they had been carried into effect, would have prevented the men from committing ether crimes. Ido not think that any term ought to be named as an unbending r ule, but one-fourth or, at the utmost, one-third of tho sentence ought only to be capable of remission. Sir J. PAKINGTON—That would be the minimum period. Sir G. GREY—It is not possible to fix any minimum period. A judge frequently comes to the Secretary of state, and states that circumstances have come to his knowledge since the conviction of a criminal which induce him to think that he has passed too severe a sentence — (hear)—although they do not amount to proof of the man's innocence. In such cases justice requires that the Secretary of State should make the sentence what it would have been if the judge had been in full possession of the facts at the time of passing it. Although the regulations upon which remission should depend cannot, therefore, be made the sub ject of any unbending rule, they may be made the subject of some general rule ; and they ought to be communicated to all judges and persons holdingj udicial situations, in order that when they are passing sentence they may have a full knowledge of the amount of punishment which the prisoner will in any case have to undergo. Then comes the question of the terms upon which the remission ought to be granted, whether conditional or absolute. The committee stated that the ticket-of-leave system had been in operation for too short a time to enable them to give an opinion respecting it, and they . passed a resolution recognising the justice of its prin ciple, although they negatived a resolution that it should be acted upon in all criminal cases. The committee, in my opinion, were wise in expressing no opinion as to the merits of the system upon the facts before them ; but I propose to retain the power of granting these conditional discharges, as in many cases it may be very usefully exercised. In many cases after a prisoner has been discharged, in consequence of a strong recom mendation from the visiting justices and a certificate from a medical officer, stating that his life is in danger, he is found in a very short time committing some new crime, apparently in perfect health, having either feigned illness or recovered health by the change of scene and air, and the return to his old habits. It is highly expedient that in such a case the discharge should be conditional. Some people suppose that a ticket of leave is a sort of certi ficate of good character, and that those men only obtain it who can prove that they are reformed. There was never a more fallacious idea. It is very desirable that the illusion should be dispelled that the holder of a ticket of leave is less likely to relapse into crime than any other discharged criminal. Ticket-of-leave-holders, as a class, have been, I will not say the subject of much prejudice, but the cause of much alarm, and they have found great difficulty in ob taining any honest employment in this country. They bear upon them the stamp of the criminal. It has been proposed, in order to meet this difficulty that ticket-of leave-holders should not be restrained from leaving the country. But tickets of leave are revocable at the pleasure of the Crown, and revocation implies remission to the for mer punishment. If a ticket-of-leave-bolder is committed to prison for a new offence he is taken back after the ex piration of his term of imprisonment to undergo the re mainder of his first sentence, but if he went abroad, to France or America, how could the Crown exercise the power of revocation ? It may be said there is no objection to allowing criminals to go abroad, and many of then! have certainly enlisted in the army and male very good soldiers, but the Government could not encourage them to break the conditions of their discharge The same obstacle prevents us from allowing them to go to the colonies, to Canada, or Australia. The power of revo cation could only be exercised by the colonial authorities, by virtue of colonial acts, and it would be almost impos sible by going abroatl. Bible for them to sends number of men from the a ntipod to Portland to undergo the remainder ? f t th e ei h r sentences. Upon:this point , however, I do not now wish h erns sed by the rom an opinion. I concur in the opinion ex because it power at present possessed kmake a Government, npyeasl mittee, and I do not proposebytothmea is a useful power, even . although it be not exercised as a consideration with There is cue important general rule. terationin the regard to Western A nal l . _. ux 0 , f the sexes. A. arge in 4 i —I refer to the ineqty o and it was male convicts could not go on for many years, tralia which must not be overlooked stated before the Lords' committee that the colony could not receive 800 or 1,000 convicts a-year for the next 20 years without the adoption of some means of increasing the number of female emigrants. Hitherto the colony has refused to receive female convicts, and not unreasonably, considering the general character of the female convicts sent out from this country. The Director of Prisons in Ireland states that the class of Irish female convicts is essentially different from the class of English female con victs, and that they are no t p ersons of immoral life, usin g that term in the ordinary sense. They are not prostitutes or persons of that kind. That officer also explains the na ture of the measures taken under his direction for the reformation of these women, and certainly the results he states afford ground for hope and expectation that many of these women would make very useful settlers in a convict colony. So in England, at the establishment lately formed under the charge of Colonel Jebb, to which female prisoners were draughted from Brixton Prison, the greatest pains are taken to effect their reformation. I hope that by some such mean s the difficulty will to a certain degree be overcome. Th e 10th resolution of the Commons' committee recommended that the hulks system should be finally abandoned. Fo r some time p ast that s y stem has ü be se e d n in st coursechathnonif aebraenfderonimuveenitid prisoners, and means are, and the only hulks now being taken for providing a prison on shore to which those prisoners may be removed. When that is effected, the total abolition of th e hulk system, which is liable to seri ous objection, will take place. There i s a nother resolution of the committee to which I wish; to refer, and the pro riety of which I , wit h all res p ect, rather doubt. The 16th resolution states—" That over convict on his release with a ticket-of-leave ought to be reported to the police of the town or district to which he is sent." I certainly should be sorry to call the attention of the police in every case to these men released with a ticket-of-leave for that might have the effect of increasing the difficulty of those well disposed in obtaining honest employment. With re spect to London, the police have reports of the character and course of life of the men with tickets-of-leave, resid ing in their districts under their instructions, which I be lieve they honestly ac t up to. Ido not think any ob structions are placed in the way of the ticket-of-leave men obtaining an honest livelihood. lam aware that a meet ing took place a short time ago, over which a noble earl presided, and at which some ticket-of-leave men made com plaints of the conduct of the police, on account of interfer ing with their endeavours to obtain honest employment. Such conduct, if the charge were tree, was most unwar rantable ; and all I can say is, that if any policeman acted in the way described he acted contrary to his instructions. I obtained from the Commissioner of Police the names of the convicts who made these charges, with the view of in vestigating their allegations, and all the constables im peached will be punished if those allegations should prove to be true. (Hear.) With respect to the gratuity payable to the convicts for some time after their discharge, I have made arerngements to have it paid by a superintendent of police, instead of its being sent by post-office order to the convict hieiself. I believe there are no other points to which I need refer. The bill 1 now ask leave to introduce is ready to be presented to the house, and it embodies anxious xr d iro i ou m v si p s t o i oo r n t c a so n n importance. thanit t W thhe h ey e c n hoan t v h ve e e np b ri bill b ca i e s b i ol n yf the result of the deliberations of the Government on a sub the hands of hon. members, they will then perceive more my explanation. With respect to the f s y t i i e r a u e ls e l es arethat n ei the n g. p bill a s s should e every clay, be l andon g j c btsd e l ehee e c ceel s t oi r ihn o y l f da y oe üb g dr t l r : h eee o bl e . a tde t n n ei d an a ldug i t tn ffi u s, ief r ls c r e s u ndaem l o eran t it would be desirable, if c ome law before the next p al 0 3se s sci s : e i b n a l d e . , reading t l h as shall e l h ; e a t ie uiltl presenti s f h b o u u l su d i ne b lue e s es this day fortnight for the of moro importance should arise I will endeavour to name a day which shall meet the convenience of the house. The right hon. baronet concluded by moving for leave to in troducerightsi r hJo. n t ph. lK a is . bill. GTON said that all would agree that the baronet had only acted with a due regard to which the right hon. gentleman house public ; feeling au dhe e in tei b i r d i e n r g e i e d n fi tl is thanks for the able manner in to what he called the thewit with respect eman had explained the views of this important subject before the right hon. gentleman had alluded mi t to the ticket-of-leave system, but he (Sir J then exaggerated. 'Considering exaggerated h, alarm state of f o f crime the country w hi eh Pakington) should say that the alarm was rather: misdirected . had existed in the country during the last few months, it was but natural that a grea t f ee l ing o f a larm should exist in the public mind • t that rather atchee ko against f t tickets t s of state'but that alarm should be directed leaveof the law under w pplid to which the ew c o la rs a t s criminals were set at lib er t y in this country than against of offenders. He wished t o rem i n d the house that this which a a subject of wide and extensive interest consisted of two parts—first, the state of the law with respect to secondary punishments, and, secondly, what was scarcely less im portant, the manner in which that law was to be adminis tered and carried out • He would advert to a portion of the subject which he thought had created as much anxiety in the public mind as the system of tickets of leave—he meant the impression which existed that, on the part of the Government, a system hal obtained of indiscreetly ad vising the Crown with respect to the exercise of the prero gative of mercy. In calling attention to some instances of this kind he begged to say that he had no intention to make a personal charge against the right hon. gentleman, for he was rather alluding to the system and practice long prevailing than to any improper mode of the right hon. gentleman's exercise of his high duties. The right hon. gentleman alluded to the opinions expressed at the late assizes by some of the judges, and no doubt intended to refer to a charge of Judge Willes at the Warwick assizes. Sir G. GREY observed that the learned judge after wards explained that those observations were made under a mistake. Sir J. PAKINGTON said that it was desirable, however, that he should allude to another case brought before the grand jury at Worcester, in which it appeared that a man sentenced to fifteen months' imprisonment for high way robbery (a sentence remarkable for lenity) was, never theless. discharged at the end of nine months, on the re commendation of the right hon. gentleman. He bad had some correspondence on the subject with the right hon. gentleman, who communicated the recommendations on which he acted, and he was bound to say that if any re commendations could have justified the exercise of the prerogative of mercy in that case those recommendations maul I have afforded a justification. They were recom mendations from the most respectable men, whose bone volence bad led them to do an act which he could not ap prove. (Hear.) The impression in the public mind was that these sentences were not to be carried out. Some months ago a very respectable woman, who lived in his neighbourhood, and whose son had been sentenced in Janu ary, 1835, to four years' penal servitud e , ca ll e d u p o n him (Sir J. Pakington) and placed in his h an d s severa l l e tt ers 1 1 which she had received from her son, and which showed that he expected to be released in the approaching spring if some respectable gentleman would give a testimonial his favour. Writing from Preston Gaol, in which he was subjected to separate confinement, he said that he was quite well, and better than be had been for l a gyears—(laugtr)-- that he had as much good warm fool as he liked an good bed to lie on'; that he had no taskwork to do, and that he did just as much as he.liked—(laughter)—that he had nice clean walks to walk upon, and that, in short, he was en joying life as much as any man could possibly desire. And this, be it remembered, was the moat severely penal part of his sentence. (Sir G. Gray.—" No part of those sentences is rt ndergor4 in the prison at Preston. There must be s ,me error. Perhaps it is all a myth.") He begged the right bon. gentleman's pardon. The whole of the fif teen letters which had been placed in his hands were written upon the pr i n t e d forms of the gaol. (Sir G. Gray admitted that he was mistaken when he inter rupted the right hon. baronet.) The writer of those letters said that the chap lain of the gaol had told him that if he would only desire his friends to endeavour to obtain a testimonial in his (the prisoner's) favour, he might be re leased in the course of this year. Now, as the prison au thorities were cognisant of the contents of every letter written by the prisonere, it could not be supposed that they would have permitted the prisoner to bo under a misap ossibility of his release before the prehension as to the I) . term of his sentence had expired if thefbelieved that no '• • xisted. [Sir G. Grey— "Prisoners' letters such passibility e are sealed, but not corrected by the prison authorities." In March, 1456, the prisoner was removed from Preston Gaol to Portland, and be wrote a letter to his mother in Sept. last, in which ho stated that he was well and happy, that he had plenty of food, and wasgetting stout; that he had been placed in the shoemakers' shop in which there were 30 men, and that they had the plegeof conversing with each other. Now, as the right hon. baronet had un dertaken the revision of the system of secondary punish here was to be no outlet in the colonies fur meats, and as t our criminals as heretofore, it was surely of the utmost that the public should be distinctly informed importance that the penal sentences passed in lieu of those of trans portation should be rigidly enforced. (Hear, hear.) He (Sir J. Pekin ' g ton) had over and over again contended that t it was a great defect havin toe intermediate punishmen between two years' imprisonmnt and seven years' trans of penal ortation, or its equivalent, and that the periods . p servitude fixed by the act of 1853 were nothing like equi valent for the periods of transportation for which the tily were substituted. He was therefore extremely glad l. his right hon. friend was about to remedy the se defects, o re want the latter of which additional proof, if any such we lled the ing, was afforded by the letters to which he had ca _ .. e attention of the house. The writer of those lettere,inwhil the undergoing his sentence of penal servitude, was elated neighbourhood of his friends—he continually hstsulggfaci li that his mother should come and sees im h wascontinually ties for correspondence with them, d •od c he should saying that after a comparatively short tilerthe was rejoin them. them. In the case of transporta.e e is for at least solute and necessary separation friar . 1 ralsnwhose sentences seven years ; and indeed, as no crimpoonotry_ a. practice had expired were brought back to this a sentence of seven which was very unjust t o the convicnts o f b a nishment for n e years' transportation op erated as if p._ ro vide the mean s he life, for unless the man could himse There was, how ever, could never return to this countr hon.Y baronet which he one part of the plan of the right H e meant that por tion max led with conside rable doubt. n wer e to be altogether by which sentence s of transportatio ma tter of uncertai nt y , done away with , and it was to be a anal servitude, whe when a man was to be sentenced to p b e e sent abroad. He Cher he would r emain in England or `mould reconsider this hoped that the right hon. baronet wo f all things wanted tion of the scheme, because what we o por 2 „ r been) Was trans to get rid of was uncertainty. (II Octo be regarded as portation, so far as it was maintai , oldie, or as a boon the severest punishment for the most seemed to be left for the well conducted ? That question baronet. He open by the explanation of the right hon. aided as the P kineton) hoped that it would be reg (Sir J. a . 0 what had fallen punishment, but he inferred from severestect of the right right hon. baronet that, with the ohs from would for thefuture salting the feelings of the colonists, he d The right hon. selec t well-conducted men to be sent abroa • rieg theun barb. (Sir G. Grey) was hardly justified in comp n a w. h that certainty of the old system of transportatio it t which for which had recently , prevailed. The uncertain Y se the mer ly existed was merely that of illness. It aro from t abroad. lasi that convicts who wereill or infirm were not sen d to seven It a as true that some years ago persons sentence instead of e ' transportation were sent to the hulks yea.s and it had abroad, but that had long been discontinued, for many years been understood that a sentence oft trans portation was always carried into effect. One statern . which had been made by the right hon. gentleman (S'r el, Grey) was, in his (Sir J. Pakington's) opinion calculated t d to mislead the country. The right hon. gentleman sta e that in 1855 there were 77,000 summary convictions, andt 25,000 convictions for offences of a more serious kind, sat assizes and sessions ; while in 1856 there were 77,000 The ma y convictions, and only 19,000 for graver offence these inference which would be drawn by the public fromoo n figures was that there had been a diminution of 6, 0 i the number e grave offences. This inference would not, howeve r, be altogether correct, as he belie ved the apparent dim i nu tion was in part accounted for b y the fact that into under the Summary Jurisdictions Act, which camewould operation in the autumn of 1855, many eases which es were previously have been sent to the sessions or assiz_ n con. now summarily disposed of by the magistrates. .1 , elusion the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Paking 9 1 ' 1 ex 7 pressed his sa'isfaction that the attention of p his s i pun . on had been thus early called to this subject, and THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 10, 1857, that all members of that house would be anxious so to shape the bill as best to attain the objects which it had in view. (Bear, hear.) Mr. COLLIER said both the Secretary of State and the r i g ht here gentleman opposite had placed the question on its true footing : what were they to do with their dangerous convicts—with that class of criminals whom their ancestors disposed of summarily by hanging, whom we had been in the habit of transporting, bat, inasmuch as public opinion was against transportation, we were able to do nothing with. In considering this question, they must not lose sight of two things : what they were desirous of doing in the ab stract, and what they were capable of doing. In the first place, the question arose what was to be done with the worst class of criminals who ought to have been hung but had not, who ought to have been convicted of murder, whereas they had been convicted of manslaughter, because the juries who tried them had an objection to hanging, or men who had been convicted over and over again of gross personal violence and perhaps had escaped by accident. It seemed to him there was one thing to do with regard to that class of criminals, and that was permanently to exclude them from society. They must regard the interest of society rather than that of the criminal. The public should be protected from violence rather than the criminal should have a chance of reformation. If, then, it were conceded that hardened criminals must be excluded from society, the question next arose—should that be done at home or abroad 7 The right hon. baronet (Sir J. Pakington) thought it should be abroad. Now, there were two senses in which they might speak of transportation ; in one of which it was admitted on all hands to have succeeded, but in the other it was equally admitted to have failed. In the one sense, transportation meant the conveyance of criminals to colonies where the free settlers largely preponderated, where there was a lerge demand for labour, and where the colonists were willing to employ COLIN ids. That kind of transportation obviousy required conditions which it was not always in the power of the Government to supply. The other kind of transportation contemplated the estab lishment of purely penal settlements—such as Norfolk Island ; and it was that kind of transpoitation which was admitted to have signally failed. The mother country had no right to transport, in the first sense, the hardened cri minals of which he was speaking. They had no more right to turn persons of that class loose in the colonies than they had at home. Such persons were enemies of the community, and the Legislature had no right to suffer them to prey on society anywhere. That being conceded, the only question that remained was, would you keep criminals of that class in prisons at home or in prisons abroad—for a purely penal colony was, to all intents and purposes, a prison abroad ? He (Mr. Collier) thought that all the arguments were in favour of keeping our dangerous criminals at home. In the first place, by that course they would save the expense of sending the man out. In the next, they would have a better class of officers at home than they could have abroad. In the next place, the Home-office would be able to exercise a stricter surveillance over a convict establishment at home than would be possible if placed at a distance. In fact it was utterly impossible that such atrocities could take place in this country as had been perpetrated in Norfolk Island. Lastly, there were means of usefully employing,the labour of convicts at home which wore wanting abroad. There were, for instance, vast tracts of land on Dartmoor which might be reclaimed, and there were many other iirsportant public works for which convict labour was needed. Now it might bet said that imprisonment for life was too severe a sentence to inflict; but imprisonment for life did not neces sarily imply detention for life within the walls of a gaol. What he meant by perpetual imprisonment was merely safe custody. He would not even exclude hope; for he had no doubt that it would be foundpossible after the lapse of time to allow a prisoner indulgences which would not militate against his safe detention. On thispoint abundant evidence had been given before the committee in favour of Dartmoor rather than of Norfolkleland. Besides he could not suppose that the people of this country would be so unreasonable as to cavil at imprisonment for life at home while they were perfectly willing to allow it abroad, where it could not be carried out under circumstances so favourable to the pri soner at home. (Hear, hear.) With regard to less har dened offenders a great difficulty arose. This country had not facilities for transporting them to colonies of the first kind; and they could not be imprisoned for life. It had indeed been proposed by the Recorder of Birmingham (Hr. Hill), and by several other persons, that a criminal should be kept in confinement until he had given distinct evidence of his reformation ; and that if necessary he shoal i be de tained for life. Now be (Hr. Collier) did not think that that plan could be carried out ' • for who were the parties to be satisfied with re s p ec t to the criminal's reformation ? Were they to be the visiting justices ? Was it to be the chaplain ? He (Hr. Collier) did not think the public would be willing to leave a question of such moment as a man's liberty or perpetual confinement in the hands of the chap lain ; for he could quite conceive a chaplain not being satisfied with a convict's theological sentiments, and on that ground thinking him unfit to be let loose on society. (Hear.) It seemed to him (Hr. Collier), therefore, that the best thing they could do would be to transport as many of these less desperate offenders as they could find colonies willing to receive them ; and to subject the rest to longer terms of penal servitude—terms which it might be hoped would break up those criminal cliques and coteries of which they had formed members. It had been recommended by Sir Archibald Alison to found one or two semi-penal colonies to receive this class ; and to which four or five free settlers should be sent out for every convict. But such a plan was open to more than one serious objection. It would be attended with extreme ex pense ; and the new colonies would be of such a purely ar tificial char rater that they could never be expected to lourish. (Hear.) One of the great points of those who pleaded for transportation at any cost was that transports seldom or never returned ; but that would not be an advan tage which would accrue from the proposed plan. The rea son why transports had not hitherto returned to this coun try was, they had been absorbed into the free colonial population ; but if they were sent to mere penal establish ments, depend upon it they would find their way back again to St. Giles's. On the other hand, they might hope that if they gradually extended to convicts at home the privilege of freedom, they might learn to use it without abusing it. If they did not, and offended again, why then they must imprison them for the rest of their lives. (Cheers.) The right hon. baronet (Sir J. Pakington) ob. jaded to the proposal of the Government, on account of the uncertainty which would still remain whether a definite sentence would be carried out. But that uncertainty was in the nature of things. If they left it (as they ought to leave it) to the Home-offiee to select which of the convicts should be sent abroad, the judge could only sentence the prisoner before him to penal servitude, and lot the govern. ment say whether the man should or should not pass the time in a prison at home. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Collier) would not on the present occasion dwell on the important question whether anything could be done by the govern ment for the criminal when his sentence had expired. He thought not; for ho thought that all that must be left to private individuals. Nor would he do more than allude to the promise of the right hon. gentleman to bring in a mea sure for the reformation of j uvenilteoffenders. Ile thought it a wise and sound measure to connect the reforma tion of the young with measures -of greater severity to adults, and on the whole he considered the plan of the right hon, gentleman a very important step towards the improvement of our criminal administration. (Cheers.) Sir J. RA MSDEN had had his attention called in a very painful manner to the subject before the house, for the die. trict in which he lived had been alarmed by the perpetra tion of many very serious crimes clearly traceable to re leased convicts. As far as he could gather the intentions of the Government from the speech of the right hon. baro net (Sir G. Grey), they appeared to have adopted two of the most important resolutions of the committee of last session. The former of those resolutions recommended a return to transportation so far as it was available as a means of punishment. The other resolution recommended that the sentences of penal servitude prescribed by the act of 1853 should be lengthened, so as to be identical with the terms of transportation for which they were substituted. If he had ever heard of any large and efficacious scheme for dealing with crime, he might perhaps have felt dissa tisfied with the scheme of the right hon. baronet ; but so far as he knew, the problem still remained unsolved. That transportation possessed many advantages to the country was now prettily generally admitted ; but he thought that the committee had stated those advantages rather too strongly when they said that it bad both a deterring and a reformatory effect. So far from that, all the evidence went to show that transportation as a punishment was not dreaded by the criminal classes. No doubt it had great ter rors for the accidental offender, the man who was still held by the ties of family; but the habitual criminal looked upon his existence as one of mere exile rather than as a condemna tion to penal servitude. Even in 1837, when the severities of Norfolk Island were at their height, they found Sir G. Arthur, the governor of Van Diemen's Land, deploring the ignorance and insensibility of the criminal classes to trans portation, and actually proposing that measures should be taken by the Government, by the publication of tracts, with in educated r te r place cha es! least d the hardships and deg radation of convicts when working in chaina (Cheers.) Ag ain, transportation could hardly be appropriatebe fore the epictorial o f thelowest illustrations, and recommended as a reformatory punishment ; for they had it in evidence that both in New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land the exp irees and ticket-of-leave men were the very worst class of offenders in those colonies, (Bear.) . But, although the purifying effects of transportation on th e criminal had been a little overstated, it would be dif ficult indeed to exaggerate the service it did the mother country, by freeing it from a dangerous pest. At the same time, he thought the Government had adopted a sound and wise policy in declaring that convicts should no longer be forced upon the colonies unwilling to receive them ; and that resolution, no doubt, much harrowed their facilities of resorting to transportation. He (Sir J. Rams den) was delighted to find that the Government were going also to take steps for promoting the reformation of juve nile offenders. Every day's experience showed that the protection of society by the reformation of adult criminals was almost hopeless, and that it was by attempting the i mprove ment of youthful offenders alone that any real or abiding good could be effected. (Oheers.) Mr. ADDERLEY thanked the right hon. gentleman for having brought forward the subject at so early a period of the session. He agreed with every word that had fallen from him, and if anything had disappointed him, it w as that the right hon. gentleman's measure did not go farther. He hoped the right hon. gentleman would make up hi s mind to abolish tickets cf leave altogether. (Cheers.) Mr. LABOUCHERE said that the proposal of his right hon. friend had been so favourably received by a l most every speaker, and there had been such& general desire that the principal discussion should take place on the second reading of the bill, that he did not feel it neck Amy to tres pass for any lengthened time. But he could not help ex pressing his satisfaction—not his surprise, for he had not expected that it would be otherwise—that no speaker was at all disposed to view this question exclusively as regarded empirealar m had b y the interests of this country, as distinguished from those of e ees colonial that the colonies. (Hear.) We were bound to. take a large and comprehensive view of the general interests of the en during of the ou recess en tire British empire—not to consider merely what might bo convenient and agreeable to ourselves with regard to our own home population, but to take into consideration the past history and the present interests and feelings of the colonies. He had never believed that it would be other particular expressions which had fallen from some hon. mem bers last year, and from the crime which existed in this try. But he was perfectly certain that when Parliamentcoun met the colonies would soon discover that there w beenwis . excited Accounts i some e come portions on the part of that house to deal with them othears no desire on such an important question. (Hear, hear.) than justly this question of transportation might be ndoubtedly re ference partly to this country and considered in empire. With regard to this country,partly to our colonial dis puted that there was the greatest it could not be to resort, in a considerable degree, to advantage in being able transpor tation for certain classes of criminals, a system of of dispute—it had been matter It might be matter opi nion amongst those who had of great difference of subject— how far transportation was most considered the to our criminal or was not a deterring punish mentvery unequally. To be sent He believed that it acted an object of great out of the country was to some punishment; but error, and it might be a deterring creasing class towhom believed that there was a lerge wed in but a punioh transportation would be anything ment. Coat i rad etory opinions had been given before the committees by persons well qualified to speak on the subject. Judges and others were of opinion that tran sportation was in a high degree a deterring punishment ; on the other hand, chaplains and governors of gaols, and persons who knew the habits of the criminal community, were strongly of opinisa that transportation as a deterring punishment was fast losing its force. So far hack as 1832, when Col. Pavies's committee sat, there was au intimation that transportation was beginning to lose its terrors, as de terring from crime, acrd that something else must be looked to. Sir W. Molesworth's committee expressed that opinion much more strongly. Remembering that within the last 20 years no loss than half a million of persons bad gone as vo luntary emigrants to the shores of Australia, he could not believe that in that class of persons, from whom those emi grants had proceeded, there could exist the same dread of transportation that had existed 20 years ago, when it was hardly possible, either by persuasion or bribes, to induce any portion of our agricultural population to leave the coun try. Still, it could not be questioned that, as a means of disposing of a large class of our criminal population, of re forming them, and giving them a far more favourable chance of improvement than they could have at home, trans portation, as an adjunct of a system of secondary punish ment, was most valuable, and ought, by every means in our power, so far as was consistent with our duty to our colonies, to be preserved. The Government had considerel the question during the recess with all the attentism which its importance deserved, and had come to the conclusion that, while they continued the system, they could not re commend that convicts should bo transported to any part of the British dominions, except that already open to their reception—the colony of Western Australia. There had been a great deal of discussion out of doors on the sub ject, and members thus approached the question with their minds far better informed than they would otherwise have done. The correspondence that had taken place between men of great knowledge and experience as to the expedi ency of transporting convicts to certain places showed that however, at first sight, those places might appear adapted to the purpose, there were great objections to them. In speaking of Western Australia as the only place, he did not mean that the Government would preclude themselves from taking advantages of openings that might arise in any other part of the world. But at that moment they were not warranted in holding out the prospect that any other colony would receive convicts. The places recommended in the Lords' report were Vancouver's Island, the Gulf of Carpentaria, and Western Australia. The first was placed very near to California and the United States of America ; there was a large proportion of Indians on the island itself and close to its shores; and considering its immense dis tance from this country, and the great expense of transport ing convicts there, it would be most unwise in the Govern ment to propose to found a convict establishment there. With regard to the Gulf of Carpentaria, no doubt the house would be disposed to maintain inviolate the pledge given to our Australian colonies—not to inflict convicts upon them without their free consent, and would maintain that pledge not only in the'letter, but in the spirit. They would not only net send convicts to the colonies themselves, but not to any place which would give easy access to those colonies. From imperfect information we possessed about the Gulf of Carpentaria, he was far from satisfied that the climate was fitted for a convict settlement--the very last accounts from that place spoke most unfavourably of the climate. There was another objection still stronger. The house would not be disposed to place convicts in any situation where they could filter towards neighbouring colonies. The sheep walks in Moreton Bay were extensive ; already they were within 600 miles of Carpentaria; consequently there would be a probability of the convict population of the latter place finding their way to the colony of New South Wales, to which we were pledged not to send them. As to the Falkland Islands, Capt. Sullivan told the committee of the House of Lords that they were admirably adapted for a convict settlement with one drawback—after the convicts were liberated there was no probability of private em ployers taking them into their service to any extent. That was absolutely fatal to the Falkland Islands as a convict settlement; and he strongly protested against the principle en which some persons recommended the Falkland Islands as a convict settlement—that the convicts would somehow or other fitter away, and net be heard of any more. That might be true of a more handful, but any considerable number of convicts would become an absolute pest to the whole neighbourhood, and the adjacent colonies would not endure it for a moment. This was evident from what occur red at Bermuda. Occasionally convicts were pardoned there, and ha I as good a right to go where they liked as any member of that house. Some had attempted to go to the United States ; and the States had immediately passed the most stringent laws, to the effect that if a vessel arrived at any port of the United States with a single pardoned convict on beard, that vessel should be sub ject to the heaviest penalties, should be sent back again, and not allowed to break bulk. This bad actually taken place in New York. He mentioned this to show that it was not such an easy thing to establish convict settlements, and let the convicts go when they were par doned, as some persona supposed. The state of feeling in the world on those subjects were much altered, and the moans of communication in the world verb very much altered. (Hear, hear.) Even our own colonies had passed laws to the same effect. The colony of Victoria had passed a law of a very stringent, and in some respects a very ex ceptionable character, which prevented pardoned men from other colonies from coming to that colony. The United States had done the same thing with regard to Bar. !nude. If we sent convicts there we must keep them there, for other places would not have them. In none of the places mentioned would the government be justified in recom mending the eat iblishment of a convict settlement. There remained Western Australia, at the present moment the only British settlement open for the reception of convicts, which we had never yet been able to use to the degree that was originally intended, and which the free inhabitants of the colony were anxious it should be used. It would be a very mistaken policy to go and incur great expense in other parts of the world, at all events until we had ex hausted the means which this colony was willing and able to afford. It presented setae very peculiar advantages as a place of reception for convicts. The soil, though very fer tile, was more adapted for sheep pasture than for agricul ture. The sheepwalks were not so extensive there as in other parts of Australia, and the population were conse quently more kept together. This was a great means of preventing the escape of convicts ; there was hardly an in stance of an escape since it had been a convict colony. It had also this advantage—a very great one with reference to the other colonies of Australia. There was hardly any communication by sea from Western Autralia to the other colonies. There was very little coasting trade ; the trade, such as it was, was almost entirely with British India and with England. There were considerable resources that might be developed by the convicts sent there ; ,but, gene rally speaking, Western Australia did not furnish much to the other colonies ; and the navigation was extremely long and dangerous round the cape at the south-western eorner of Australia. A very great timber trade was spring ing up there. The Admiralty had just concluded a con tract for timber from Western Australia ; and he trusted that this trade might induce the investment of capital there, and be the means of employing men. Still, it was only to a certain extent, and for a limited time, that they could look to the introduction of convicts into that colony. It would require the greatest caution, vigilance, and cir cumspection on the part of the Government if Western Australia was to continue to receive convicts. It would be the duty of the Government to do everything in their power to surmount the difficulties that existed. One of the principal was the necessity of taking care to keep up something like an equality between the sexes. His atten tion hafl been anxiously directed to that subject; he was in communication with the Emigration Commissioners, and hoped to be able to find a remedy for that which had hitherto been a serious evil in our convict colonies. One measure which he had felt it his duty to take, in accord ance with the recommendation of the Lords' committee, was to give facilities to convicts to send for their wins and children, also to send out destitute young women of good character to the colony. It would also be necessary to encourage, as far as they could, the emigration to that colony of free emigrant., between whom and the co nv i c t s it was or the utmost importance that the duo proportion should be kept up. Under these circumstances they might hope that the colony would prosper. It was indeed far from brine in a decaying condition. In 1319 the popula tion was 5,564—a1l free, no convicts having been then sent there. In 1855 the population had doubled :it was 10,630, and a convict population of 2,175. In 1849tlerevenue was 9,56 i/. ; in 1655, 34,451/. The exports, in 1849 i 28,551/ ; in 1855, 105,3a01. The imports were,, were in 1849, 26,1501. ; in 1855, 46,3011. Th e house would perceive be ive that this colony, under judici ous management, might the means of relieving us of our convict population for some time to come. It h a d doubtless been an expensive colony ; but all penal co l on i es were necessarily so ; and the house must make up its mind to that if it wished transportation to be carried out with effect. But it had not been so expensive as penal colonies in former days. Transportation to this commenced in colony i expense there • and the whole of sending: and maintain ing them there had been 4C6,0031 Looking back to the settlement of New South Wakes, he found that in the first 12 years only 4,561 male convicts were sent out, at an ex. pense of above a million of money, or more than double the cost of the convicts sent to Western Australia, which was not so extravagant as some gentlemen had been led to sup pose. And if we were to have transportation anywhere, to any penal settlement, we must make up our minds to pay for it. H o mug express his satisfaction at the fair and candid spirit in which the proposal of tee Government had been met by .the house. As far as principles were con cerned, there•did not seem to be any great diversity of sentiment. Above all, he rejoiced, that while members were anxious to find a remedy for any evils in the penal code of this country, they were not unmindful of their per manent obligation to the British colonies, and were deter mined to do nothing, either in letter or spirit, to violate those pledges which they had repeatedly given, not to in terfere with the expressed wishes of the colonies on this subject, not to send convicts to any colony which was not willing to receive them, and even not to place convict s in Britth co situat;on where they could give just offence to any lony. (Hear, hear.) Mr. BENTINCK did not think the method proposed the best way of dealing with th e subject. He would esta blish penal settlements nearer home, and utilise th e l a b our of the convicts. Mr. M. MILNES congratulated the right hon. b arone t which both on his bill and on his s p eec h , in he h a d intro duced it ; all ho regretted was , that they had not both b een made public long since, i n w hi ch case much nons ens e, panic, and discomfort m i g h t have been prevented. He trusted that another ten years would not be suffered to elapse before the legislature adopted reformatory measures for adult criminals. Mr. J. G. PHILLIrted R Ewas opposed t o th e s ystem of transportation, and g that it was wh o ll y ineffectual Captain Macconochie, to show as a reformatory process'; but produced vices and crimes that was degrading to humanity. He objected to giving power t o the police to watch over the actions of peoplewho were not i n custody, and against whom no accusation was made, as opposed to the feelings of the country, Mr. NE WDEGA.TE thought the country had good ground for the alarm they entertained, and he than ked the press for its exert i on in pressing the subject on the public attention Mr. LIDDELL suggested that arrangeme nts mi g ht pos sibly be ma d e for employing convict labour a t Demerara, very where l a b our of a - superior character cou ld be found, but where Vie difficulty of obtaining labour to cultivate the land had eccasionedmany valuable estates to be thrown out of cultivation. Much had been said about the treat ment of criminals but in many places they were treated as well, or b e tt er , than our soldiers. He admired as much a any one the b-nevolence of those men who gave up their time and means to better the po sition of criminals—he re spected them for so doing , b ut he repected the public more, and he thought that in many cases misunderstood clemency and misapplied liberality were fatal not only to the gene-' rag welfare, but even to self. Sir G. GREY replied. In reference to the cases to which Sir J. Pakington referred, he wished to state that he had at all times resisted the many applications which had been made to him to extend the , s t y ,, stein of tick e t s of Joey,: to theed who u,re.;:— .. e l,l ..o. A . ten •1 i..-zlituao. With regard to Ft c ase whichh , ad been instanced in whi c h a man sentenced t o 15 wonth b imprisonment had been set at large, he bogged to inform the house that, having ilea a petition presented to him stating that this man had up I to that time led a very upright life, which petition was al I . eempanied by evidence of many mitigating facts, he he d not acted directly, but had sent the papers to Chief B tat .11 Pollock, who had tried the man, and that learned b are ra had advised him that the man ought to be set at libert y. Mr. M. GIBSON understood that the right bon.bar ,n et had represented him to have said that there was a grea 6. in crease of crime and pauperism. That was a mistake. that he had said was this—that the passage in the Qur iton'fi speech referring to this subject was, he feared, too fas tau' ably penned. Leave was then given to bring in the bill. REFORMATORY SCHOOLS. Sir G. GREY, in rising to move for leave to bring in a bill to facilitate the establishment of reformatory sch 001 0 1 .said be would detain the house but a few moments. The house was aware that the reformatory schools reef tntly established were dependent almost entirely upon voluretarl contributions. The only exception was, that for entery child sent the Treasury had to pay a certain sum, and in certain. cases payment's were directed to be made by the parents. The bill which ho desired to introduce did not ire any war seek to interfere with voluntary institutions. Those insti tutions, though they were increasing in number, were yet, comparatively speakintr * , but few. It was, therefol thought desirable to introduce the present bill, which as no permis sive in its scope, and enabled counties and b ,roughs to establish reformatory schools, and to defray the cetpense of so doing out of the borough and county rates. Th era were provisions enabling several counties or borough s to join together for the purpose of forming larger astabli shmente than they could do if separate. With respect to tl'ie intro duction of children, one difference existed banned en those proposed schools and the establishments already-. in exist ence. In these latter the managers had a right o f reject ing auy child if they thought fit. Of course in id 're refor- Matories to be erected under this bill no such riglir t wou!d exist, for the simple reason that they could not 'b a volun tary charities, but on the contrary supported on tof the rates. The bill contained provisions similar to the, sections of the existing act, for casting the expense of mail] itaining children, or a part of it, upon the parents, as well" as some union provision, into which it was not necessary t o enter at that stage, the observations which he had alresey made pointing at the main features of the measure. Mr. SCOTT asked if the bill would extend to W ales? Sir G. GREY said that it would. Mr. DFEDES suggested that the committing CO4l rt from which the child was sent would be the proper trills anal to determine whether the parents of the child ought. to eon tribute to the expense of keeping that child at sch a )1. Sir J. PAKINGTON wished to express the gross; t satis faction which he felt at hearing the statement of L ,e right hon. baronet. He approved of the suggestion wlai ch the hon. member (Mr. Deedes) had made with refers nee to the payment by parents for children at these school and trusted the Government would take the subject ire to con• sideration. Mr. ALCOCK regretted to see the house so ready to en ter upon lavish expenditure in behalf of these refers natory schools, when hou. members were so chary in srs andiog money in the cause of education. Mr. ADDERLEY inquired whether there was arKy pro vision in the bill which would enable treasurers of coun ties and boroughs to obtain payment from parerets and step-parents of children in reformatories ? Sir G. GREY said that there was such a provismn, and Mr. Sidney Turner, who had been selected from his long experience in reformatory schools as an inspector, would be specially charged with the carrying out of such provi sions as made it obligatory on parents and step-pare nts to contribu:;e to the support of their children in reformatories. Sir S. NORTHC'OTE said that ho thought it desirable that the judge who sent a child to the reformatory should be empowered to say what amount should be paid by the parents ; and he was sorry that that part of the bill of 1351 had been struck out. lie thought that the inspec tors should make reports. Sir G. GREY—They are bound to do so. Leave was given to bring in the bill. THE ROYAL MARINES. Sir M. BERKELEY obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the act for limiting the time of service in the Royal Marine forces. CFATHAM LANDS. S;r M. BERKELEY obtained leave to bring in a bill for enabling tho Commissioners of the Admiralty to purchase certain lands in the parish of Chatham, in the county of Kent, and to stop up, divert, or alter certain ways in the said parish, and for other purposes. INCLOSURE OF LANDS. Mr. MASSEY obtained leave to bring in a bill to au. thorise the inclosure of certain lands, in pursuance of a re• port of the inclosure commissioners for England and Wales. The house adjourned at a quarter•past 11. Country Markets. CHELMSFORD-FEE. 6. The best samples of wheat were firm at last week's rater, but second-rate qualities, much of which was out of eon* dition, were difficult to dispose of. Spring corn same ag last week, with little doing. Wheat, white, old, per s. s. 1 s. •. qr. 34 72 j Oats, per qr 24 30 new.... 37 71 I Peas, Partridge 41 43 red, old 32 62 White 39.46 new.... 32 62 Boiling 4O 47 Barley 3 i 44 Dun 37 39 Chevalier 33 52 Beans, Tisk .36 40 Grinding 33 44 Harrow ticks 40 41 Malt 73 77 Mazagan 35 37 Chevalier 75 79 Ditto, new... 35 19 COLCHESTER- FEB. 6. Prices to-daywere as follow :—Wheat, white, 623 to 745; red, 56s to 645; barley, 44s to 52s ; oats, 24s to 283 ; beans, Mazagan, 36s to 333 ; middle and small, 37s to 445; peas, white, 403 to 41s ; grey, 40s to 425. Official Statement of the Quantities of Corn, &c., rot:siva in the port of London, from the following ports, frost Jan. 26 to Jan. 31, both inclusive. tp" -'; r A '4 7 . 1 - ',l d 0 A I D. 8 a - - - 60 L 140 - 179$ , 186 , 660 Colchester Harwich Leigh Maldon 90; 150 1 277 697 40)i 61? M e 483 615 j - KIRKCALDY -FED. 7. To-day we had rather large supplies of wheat and oats, but small of barley. Sales slow ; fine wheat end barley brought last week's prices—inferior, as well as inferior oats, of which the oat supply consisted, were 15 per qr. lower. Wheat. Barley. 1 Oats. I Beans. First s B' Od I 43s Od ( 25s Od lOs Oa Secon d d 30 52 s Od s Od. I 41s Od 238 6(1 Os Od Thir 32e 0,1 y 20s Od i Os 04 Oatmeal, 36s to 38s per bag of 2801 b. COAL MA Prides of Coal per ton at & Bates's West Hartley a. ..,14 0 Bell's Pri mrosg 13 6 Bebaido's Hartley 15 3 Davison's West Hartley 15 6 North Percy Hartley l3 9 Taufield Moor Butes 14 3 Taufield Moor l4 3 Victoria 13 9 Stanley Main 15 6 West Riding Hartley 13 9 Walker Primrose l3 9 :Et-FEB. 9. the close of the market,. WsllBend, &Q. Waßaena, Sze Riaaell ... 16 6 1 Birehgrovo Graig•la. 2O 6 %hips at market... s d. Hetton ls Russell's Hetton 17 6 South Hetton 18 0 Uosfoitli l6 g W harneli fie Eden Main l7 3 Braddyll l7 6 Hetton Lyons Main l6 6 Lumley 17 3 Lamhtou lB 0 Stewart's 18 6 Cassop 17 6 iSouth Hartlepool .,17 0 I Sold 56 LOCAL SHARE MARKB2IB. LIVERPOOL, FEB. D. STOCK EXCHANGE. -- The market was doing a steady' business to-day, and prices were slightly higher than on Saturday. Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire, 65 London and North Western, 1061 —South Eastern, 221 /I —Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincoln, 34 x d.—Midland, 82/ I—Blackburn, 83—East Lancashire, 23i ,Lancashire and Yorkshire, 96 4 — Eastern Counties, 9.6.3.—N0rth Eastern, Berwick, 21i ,} —St. Helen's 5 per cent. Mock, B, 105—Do. gr. 6 per cent. Stock C, 1211. BIRMINGHAM, FEB. 9. . STOCK EXCHANGE.—There was a dull market to-day' and a limit e d b usiness. Ncrth 2taffords, 4.13.9. dis.-- - Birmingham C ana l s, Mills, 3i. 93 ex div.—Birmingham Nov Union MANCHEER,B. 9. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The m ST arket was active to-day, but very little change in valued. Dovers, 3-16---Leeds, 96i —Midland s , 82g—London and South Western, 1061--' Blackburn, Bi----East Lancashire, 23i—Shettields, 34i — Great 'Western, Gq—Midland Great Western, halves, 26 — Cheshira Juuct., 23i—Belfast and Ballymena, halves, 2 q —Bank of Manchester, pm. BIRTHS. op A SOL On the Bth inst., at Goldsmiths'-hall, London, the wife •f Walter Prideaux, Esq. On the Bth inst., at Romford Lodge, Romford, Esserics the wife of F. A. Redman, Esq. OF A TAIIGIITIB. On the Bth inst., at Eton, the wife of the Rev. J. L Joy nes. On the Bth inst., at the Terrace, Barnes, Surrey, the wife of William Howell Preston, Esq. MARBLED. , On the 7th init., at the British Embassy, Paris, the Rev. James Fletcher, M.A., of Balliol College, Oxford. to Selina Jauo Elizabeth, youngest daughter of Sir Simeon Stuart, Bart. On the 7th init., at St. Paul's, Knightsbridge, Flufi h Augustus Crofton, 11.111.'s 10th Regiment, t o Amelia Ha,riet, eldest da ug ht er of Chailes Farquharson, Dick' of Chesham-place. DIED. On the Bth inst. at Stanhope-terrace, Hyde P ark -gar dens, George Webb, Esq , Secretary to the Stook Et change, aged 70. • ": OntheBth in 4., at 40, Church-street, Chelsea, Mr. 0 * S. 13uliner, aged 33. On the Bth indt. Mary Jane, the wife of C. H. C. 3 111114 Esq., of th e East Julia House. of On the Bth init., Thomas Mann Foster, the only IS° n Thomas F os t er, of Grange-road, Canonbury, and 5, cheap, city. On the 7th hist., at 103, Eaton-squrve, Colonel James APAlpine, of Wynisor House, co. Mayo, late of the 101 King' d H ussars. - On the 7th inst., Thomas Jones, Esq., solicitor, of 601 Stanhope-street, Harupstead-roakl, aged 44. On the 7th inst., at Grove-end-road, St. John's wood ames Russell, Esq. LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG' of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, 11°. 112, Str an d, i n th e t'reeinct of the ',..Saa,vuy - , iu the 4ottu t i 0 of Middlesex, Tuesday, I'6:nary 10, 1857. - I