The Express.
London, England, 1847-06-04 00:00:00

which attended any system of transportation. He had
warned the house against that system some years ago. He
had objected to it on the ground that no control over
its administration could be exercised by this country.
He held that Lied Stanley was as guilty of negligence ea
Sir B. Wilmot, end was as deserving of disminal. He
charged Lott Meeley with nrgleet, in having appointed
unfit and leteoMpellent officers in the Colonim—lie salaried
him with die egesegelecet of that neglect which had been
the cisme era able of Meg, bleeihis and disgusting, that
to *Weep them IMINNIMUIMI beet the fate of the earth
walla be • meta: of rejoicing rather than of regret.
The queellea wet, if transportation was abolished,
what Shedd le the substitute ? Having given the
subject his beet egoideratieo, he was prepared to agree
that imptielasiese en the separate system was the
least ohjessistabk secondary punishment. By the separate
system lee event that the offender should be kept apart and
not remitted to associate with others ; that he should be
Oradea regularly by persons whose duty it should be to
afford blea religious and moral instruction; and that he
should be induced, not compelled, to work. Two grounds
of objection bad been made to that system. The one was
that it was too expensive; but he contended that
it was much better to have a system which was
expensive and effectual, then one which out com-
paratively little, but was ineffectual. The other objection
was that it was injurious to the health, and tended
to impair the mental energy of the prisoner. No doubt the
sudden transition, from active, and fretintercourse with the
world to confinement and total seclusion, would is some de-
gree act prejudicially upon both mind and body, but the sepa-
rate system was not more injurious in this respect than other
systems of secondary punishment. The mortality amongst
convicts was generally higher than amongst the rest of the
population, and if in some instances separate confinement
impoired the mental energies, it must be remem-
bered that every other system which had yet been
tried, tended to degrade and demoralise the mind.
This objection, which be admitted to exist, might,
however, be obviated in a great measure by care
and watchfulness on the part of the governors and medical
officers of the prison. He understood the government now
proposed to adopt the separate system to a certain extent;
that was that the prisoner should be subjected to it for a
period, after which he should be employed on public works,
SO as to bring him gradually back to intercourse with man-
kind. He (Sir W. olesworth) doubted the wisdom of that
arrangement. Then the question arose, what was to become
of the liberated offender after he had undergone his punish-
ment? The difficulty of obtaining employment by liberated
criminals was BO great, that they were often forced
back into crime as the only means of existence. The
Archbishop of Dublin had propesed that liberated
offenders should be furnished with the means to
emigrate to colonies where they could obtain employ-
ment. This plan the government had, to a certain
extent adopted; but then they made the emigration essmpul-
sory instead of voluntary t and the more he considered this
alteration of the archbishop's plan, the more objectionable it
appeared to be. If emigration were made compulsoi7, many
of the colonies would be extremely unwilling to receive con-
vide, especially those of North America. According to the
report of the legislative council of New South Wales, the
inhabitants of that colony were very reluctant to admit a:m-
elds, except on conditions which would be meet burdensome
to this country. Besides, the penal colonies were
the very worst places to which offenders could
be sent, because there the standard of immorality
was at the lowest point, and the criminal would have little
chance of reforming. On the other hand, if the emigration
was voluntary, the liberated offenders who would chiefly
emigrate, would be such as had reformed; those who re-
fined would he the unreclaimed and the irreclaimable. It
appeared to him that the legislature ought not to shovel out
criminals to the colonies (bear, hear) ; merely altering the
location of crime. The right boo, baronet now proposed
not only that liberated offenders should be compelled to
emigrate, but that when they arrived in the colonies they
should be treated as if they were convict*, being marked out
from the rest of the:inliabitanl by the appellation of "ticket-
of leave-men." (Hear, hear. In order to provide against
probable evils, it was propose to send out a great number
of free emigrants with the convicts. He w mid ask whether
the proportion of the sexes was to be equal ? and whether
it was likely that free ;emigrants, and especially women,
would consent to rout as the companions of convicts ?
When, in the colonies, the ticket-of-leave men, if kept by
themselves would constitute a plague spot, and on the other
hand, if dispersed, no controul could be eaercieed over them.
As regarded New South Wales, he would remind the house
that when Mr. Gladstone eonsulted the Governor last
year, with a view to renewing transportation, he
was told that the colonists would only commit to
it on conditions exceedingly burdensome to this
country; and he would take it upon himself to snort, that
their oppoeitioa was undiminished. In conclusion, he
would say, that he felt it his duty to support the government
measure in so far as it tended to abolish transportion, and to
introduce abet ter system of punishment, but to oppose it
so far as respected that portion of it which continued trans-
portation. (Hear )
Mr. BANHES could not assent to the further progreu of
thus bills. He thought it inexpedient, on constitutional
grounds, that the royal authority should be exercised in any
other than a direct manner. The bills themselves were
much more extensive than their titles would indicate—their

operation would extend to every gaol ut the kingdom. The
creation of patronage under the bill was surprising in extent;
and he viewed with jealousy the poasestion ef pa-
tronage by a party wliieh cut down offices when in
opposition, and 111 office suede appointments pre-
tending that it was only filling up TlClllCille.
The chief commissioner, whose salary of 8001. a year he
considered too low, if there must be each an omeer, had the
power at his pleasure of dismissing even the gaolers who
were appointed by the magistrates—(" No.")—suNeet, cer
tainly, to the 'auction of the commissioners of the Treasury ;
but still he had the power. Much had been said about hu-
manity to tke criminal, but they should also consider those
who suffered from crime, and whom it was their duty to
protect. If the government had seriously made up their
minds to so essential an alteration in the nature of criminal
punishment they ought to have brought forward a bill more
specifically declaring their intention. Admitting that the
present state of transportation required immediate amend-
ment, he did not however think they ought to be called on
to pass such a plan as that proposed by the government.
Mr. BWART moved the adjournment of the debate.
In answer to a question by Mr. 6. W. Hope,

Sir 0. GREY said that convicts on their arrival in the
colonies would be in the same position as if they had tickets
of leave.

The debate we then adjourned till to-morrow (this day).
The house then adjourned at a quarter before one o'clock.