The Sun.
London, England, 1855-10-10 00:00:00

THE TICKET-OF-LEAVE SYSTEM.

At the opening of the Birmingham Court of Quarter
Sessions, hell yesterday, Mr. M. D. Hill, Q.C., the Re-
corder, delivered the following charge to the grand

jury :
Gentlemen of the Grand Jury,—l have chosen for the
subject of my present charge that mode of treating climi-
"nals which has been called " the ticket-of-leave system.
.Of late this plan has attracted much attention in Parlia-
ment, in courts of justice, and in the public journals. The
general impression seems to be that it does not a ork well.
For myself, I am disposed to think that the effect of its
operation, so far as it has hitherto been tried, has been ex-
aggerated both for evil and for good. But I should be
grieved to find the system condemned in its theory, even
inpposing its practice has hitherto been open to some ani-
madversion, because it embodies what I hold to be two
most salutary principles :—First, that the criminal should
have the opportunity of working his way out of gaol ; and
second, that he should for a limited period be liable to be
deprived of his liberty so regained, if his course of life
should be such as to give reasonable ground for belief that
he had relapsed into criminal habits. To understand the

true bearings of tljte,questions which I intend to raise for
'your consideration, it will be necessary to take a compre-
hansive view of that general treatment of criminals
which results from the operation of a public Opinion making

making itself felt in the Legislature and the executive Go-
vernment, and often, unconsciously, to the agents dictat-
ing the verdicts of juries, and qualifying the sentences of
our courts, combined with other circumstances over which
none of these authorities have any effective control. Time
was—and the era is not so long past but that many of us
have a vivid remembrance of its horrors—when our penal
code was the most sanguinary of the civilised world.
The list of offences punishable with death presented
a fearful catalogue, descending from wilful mur-
der down to privately stealing in a shop to the
amount of five shillings. Nor were the terrors of the
law permitted to sleep ; so that when the feelings of the
people at last awoke to the cruelty of these inflictions they
wee e outraged at every turn with appalling scenes of legal
vengeance. As might have been expected by reflecting ,
minds conversant with history, and learning from its
pages the vicissitudes of public sentiment, an overwhelm-
ing force of opinion became directed against the ferocious
policy which had so long prevailed ; and as you know the
list of capital offences was not only promptly reduced to
the narrowest limits, but the disposition towards lenity
outstripping the course of legislation, we are at length tar
rived at the point when even in deliberate murder it is
not an inflexible rule that conviction should be followed
by execution. Gentlemen, during the period while so many
offences were punished with death, the commutation of
the capital sentence to one of transportation being an act
of mercy, the minor, though still heavy penalty was nut re-
garded as severe ; but when capital puuishment became
applicable only to a small class of crimes, transportation
oega.n to be looked upon in a different light; and now,
that by the refusal of all our colonies, except one, to ad-
mit convicts among them, transportation has been in great
part abolished. A similar feeling begins to prevail against
long terms of imprisonment, which makes way all the more
quickly, because long imprisonments not being imposed by
sentence during the period that capital punishment and
transportation were freely resorted to, present a deceptive
aspect of novelty, since a large proportion of convicts sen-
tenced to transportation were at all times left in the hulks
to be punished by imprisonment which might extend
through the whole period for which they were adjudged to
be sent abroad; although it was and is usual to discharge
them after a detention of much inferior length. How far
this disposition gradually to lessen the amount of punish-
ment will be carried it is impossible to predict. All I
can say is, that its progress is very rapid, and that it
shows no sign of having approached its termination.
We might suppose at first sight that shortening terms
of confinement would furnish a means of relieving the
pressure on the capacity of our prisons, and would
enable them to provide for the surplus numbers caused by
the stoppage of transportation. But those who are practi-
cally acquainted with the subject, know that a short im-
prisonment is likely to be followed by a speedy relapse,
and that the prisoner oftens returns to captivity, bringing
with him companions who in the interval of liberty he has
seduced into crime. Recollecting these difficulties, gentle-
men, you will not perhaps bo surprised that the Govern-
ment has not yet discovered a perfect solution of the hard
problem—what are we to do with our criminals? In this
state of perplexity it resolved on adopting to a limited ex-
tent the first principle to which I have adverted—that of
making the duration of the imprisonment dependent on
tne conduct of the prisoner. It did not apply the princi-
ple universally, possibly because it was not prepared to
contend with the strong, although, I must think, morbid,
feeling in favour of slight imprisonments under which the
culprit remains too short a time to benefit much by any
reformatory system, however potent. Thud it restricted
the experiment to the cases of such convicts as had in-
curred the penalty of transportation. Gentlemen, I spta'e
upon conjecture, but I must presume the existence o
some strong reason which induces the Government to deny
co the lesser offender the privilege of earning his discharge
'y his own exertion, while it concedes it to the greater
:militia' who has incurred the heavier punishment; awl
[ am not aware of any other reason than the one which I
nave pointed out. If, however, the reason suggested
eioul.l be that on which the Government is really acting
I trust it will be remembered that many convicts not
cable to transportation or penal servitude are sentenced
o imprisonment for as long a period as two years, awe
hat many instances may be found in the returns made
,o the House of Lords in which a less time has been held
,o furnish a sufficient length of probation to justify the
grant of tickets of leave. But, gentlemen, if you desire,
es I most earnestly do, to see this principle universally
adopted, you must be prepared to strengthen the hands
of Government by advocating such a change in tee
law as will enable those who administer the criminal jus-
tice of the country to retain in custody all such as are con-
victed of crime until they have, by sure and unequivocal 1
tests, demonstrated that they have the will and the power
to gain an honest livelihood when at large. You must be
•content that they shall be retained until habits of industry
.reformed—until moderate skill in some useful occupation
is acquired—until the hard lesson of self-control is mas-
tered--in short, until the convict ceases to be a criminal,
resolves to fulfil his duties both to God and to man, and
has surmounted all obstacles against carrying such resolu-
tions into successful action. But as no training, however
enlightened and vigilant, will produce its intended effects
on every individual subjected to its discipline, what are we
to do with the incurable ? Gentlemen, we must face this
question. We must not flinch from answering, that we
propose to keep them in prison until they are released by
death. You keep the maniac in a prison (which you call
an asylum) under similar conditions. You guard against
his escape until he is taken from you, either because he
is restored to sanity or has departed to another world. If,
gentlemen, innocent misfortune may and must be so treated,
why not thus deal with incorrigible depravity ? This is a
question which I have asked times out of number without
ever being so fortunate as to extract a reply. It is always
tacitly assumed that imprisonment must not be perpetual ;
but whether that assumption is founded on any reason sup-
posed to arise out of the nature of things, or whether it
only rests on the present state of public feeling, I know
I not. If the former ground is taken, I would give much
to learn what the argument is. When disclosed, I must
either answer it or yield to it ; but while lam kept in
the dark each alternative is shut against me. If, how-
ever, this assumed inadmissibility of perpetual imprison-
ment is rested on the present state of public sentiment,
' I have seen too often the change from wrong to right in
that great power to despair of its becoming an ally in-
stead of an opponent. It is my belief that if long
terms of imprisonment, even to.perpetuity, were placed
before the public mind as indissolubly connected with
the privilege to the convict of working out his own redemp-
tion from thraldom by proving himself fit for liberty, it
would require no great lapse of time to produce the change
in opinion which I contemplate. Alarm on the score of
expense ought not to be entertained for two reasons. First,
because no unreformed inmates of a prison, however ex-
travagant its expenditure may be, cost the community so
much as they would do if at large. This fact has been so
often proved that I must be allowed to assume it as unde-
niable. But the second reason is, that prisons may be
made either altogether or to a very great extent self-sup-
porting. In some of the western States of the North
American Republic this important object has been more
than accomplished, as the labour of the prisoners yields a
revenue greater than is required for their food, lodging
and clothing, their government, and their instruction ; in
short, for all the various items which form the total ex-
pense of a gaol. It is quite true that labour is more va!u-
.ible and that food is cheaper in those States than it is with
us. But, notwithstanding these facts, it WAS shown by the
evidence which Mr. Charles Pearson adduced before the
committee of the House of Commons appointed to investi-
gate this subject in 1850, to be in the highest degree
obtained here. ro-
bable that similar results might be obta. Who-
ever shall • read that valuable testimony will, I cannot but.
think, even if not perfectly convinced, arrive at the con-
clusion that sufficient proof has been given to justify, it
not to demand, such an experiment as would set the con
troversy at rest. Let Pie novr, gentlemen, call you amen.