The Sun.
London, England, 1837-03-24 00:00:00

been extended beyond that,
period. This experience, then,
shows us, beyond dispute, that imprisonment is not a punish-
ment the duration of which should be increased in this
country. But, Sir, I cannot help thinking that there is
great room for improvement in our system of por';.:l.iinent
by imprisonment. I observe, on looking to the last rat-, in
order to make a comparison es 'oetween this and foreign
countries in respect to the duration of imprisonments, that
the instances are very rare indeed in other countries where
imprisonment has exceeded two years. Now, it will be
curious to contrast the number of punishments for larceny
in this country and France. The following is the state of
committals and convictions in France and England, for a
period of two years, for simple larcenies, viz.
:
IN FRANCE. IN ENGLAND.
Committals.
Convictions..
11
Imprisonment for 1 year
and upwards 8,646, Transported for life. 64
Under I year 6,861 Ditto, 14 years. 223
Fined
years 1,451
of Correction 29o‘ and above 1 year........ 83
;Imprisoned for 1 year
and above 6 months... • 698
Imprisoned for 6 months
and under 6,023
'Whipped, fined, Pic....... 47
Now I should say it is most desirable (and I am happy to
say that steps are now taken by the Magistrates of counties
and the Magistrates in the different cities and boroughs in
the kingdom)
to make such regulations and arrangements
in those priso.ns, in which the punishment of imprisonment
is inflicted, ',not there may not be the same risk of conta-
mination amongst the various class of prisoners. Nothing
car: he worse, or militate more against the diminution of
Crime, than the sending such persons as may have com-
mitted small offences into a prison to associate with more
hardened offenders, and where, perhaps, they have to wait
a long time before they are tried ; or even if they are in
an ill-regulated prison for a short time only the result is
equally bad, because, if you take the better sort of indi-
viduals, say young persons or others who are committed to
prison for the first time, and who are ashamed at the
first moment of the crime which they may have com-
mitted, we send them to overhear and to mix in conversa-
tion with prisoners of the most abandoned characters.
This is exactly the way to confirm these persons in bad ha-
bits ; you take them from the society in which they were, in
which honesty is held up and crime condemned, and you send
them to a prison, where every person with whom they are
compelled to associate, from the want of classification,
holds up crime for imitation. Now the first thing you must
.- do will be to adopt a better mode with respect to this class
of persons, and to give them encouragement to pursue that
honest course which they had formerly followed. Sir,
there has been a great difference of opinion amongst many
gentlemen, as opposed to the recommendations of the in-
spectors of prisons, with respect to the two modes of pu-
nishment, the one being the silent system, and the other the
separate system. I own that I consider both these sys-
tems to be great improvements on the former more of pri-
son discipline. But one great fault in the silent system is,
that it requires a great deal of punishment to enforce its
observance, and therefore it has the effect of irritating and
provoking the prisoners. I have heard of a case in one
large gaol where the silent system is kept up where the
the number of punishments was upwards of a thousand in
one month. lam convinced, however, that by adopting
• one or other of the fixed terms of imprisonment, as the
punishment for those offences which are not characterised
by atrocity, those offences will be more properly punished
by imprisonment than by transportation. Ido not intend
at present to bring in any measure either with respect
to transportation or to imprisonment ; but as I wished
to state my views with reference to capital punishments,
I thought it would be only proper to bring under the at-
tention of the House, for further consideration, the sub-
ject of the punishments which are now adopted. I propose to
bring in several Billsebecause it is the opinion of some that
whilst some of these questions require consideration, such
as that of piracy, still they may be postponed for the pre-
sent. For this purpose I have divided the Bill into seve-
ral parts, in order to take the course which has been sug-
gested to me. One Bill will be to abolish the punishment
of death in all cases of forgery ; another for the same pur-
pose in the case of offences against the person under cer-
tain circumstances ; another to abolish the punishment of
death in cases where it now exists ; another is to abolish
the punishment of death for robbery committed on the per-
son ; another for the same purpose in the case of burglary ;
and one relates to piracy and the destroying buildings or
ships. I should say likewise that it is my intention to pro-
pose to bring in a Bill with respect to more than one
law passed of late years. When the capital punishment
was abolished, transportation for life was substituted for
it in certain cases, but that is found to be a most impo-
litic and a most inconvenient practice. There are offences,
as has been once mentioned by Lord Lyndhurst, which
tame under this head ; such as sheep-stealing (which was
formerly a capital offence), and others slight in themselves,
but where the judge is obliged to pass the sentence of
transportation for life. Now, the consequence of this has
been of late years, since I became the Home Secretary,
that the sentence of the Court is the sentence according to
the law, namely, transportation for life ; but the Judge
Communicates with the Secretary of State as to whether -a
discretion shall be exercised and the prisoner shall be really
sentenced to be transported for fourteen years, or seven
Years, or to two years' imprisonment, as the case may be ;
and I have always advised the Crown to comply with the
wishes of the Judge. Therefore the effort of the Judge is
not to carry into effect an unjust sentence, but the object
seems to be to keep from the knowledge of the public the
nature of the sentence which is really inflicted. Thus we
have one sentence in Court given according to law, and
another is, in fact, practically put in force. But sometimes
there is the Chairman of a Quarter Sessions who pronounces
the sentence, and these gentlemen have informed me that
they have not themselves been allowed to make an applica-
tion to the Home Secretary. , I have appealed to some
Chairmen, and 1 have then found that they had not
applied to the Secretary of State ; but they have
assured me that if they had known there was a
discretionary power, they would not have passed such
and such a sentence. That, Sir, is an injustice
and an inconvenience, and therefore I seek to repeal that
' Part of the law, and to give a discretionary power in other
eases. I shall likewise propose to bring in a Bill to abo-
lish the punishment of the pillory—a punishment which is
never inflicted. These are the measures which I now pro-
Pose to introduce. lam aware that I have detained the
House for a long time—( Hear, hear)—in making this
statement ; but I did think it my duty, in proposing such
imPortant alterations in the law, to give this mere outline
of the changes which I propose to introduce, in order that
they may be maturely considered. We have seen of late
Years very considerable alterations made with respect to our
criminal law. Sir Samuel Romilly and Sir James Mackin-
tosh led the way to mitigate its severity, and put into the
strongest light the faults, the absurdities, and the imperfec-
tions of our firmer code. The Right Hon. Gentleman
°Pposite (Sir It. Peel) has consolidated the various enact-
ments on this subject, and by bringing them from the various
statutes through which they were dispersed, he has brought
rthem together so as to make them more consistent and uni-
rrm, in order to enable the country and the world at
iarge to know what is the law ; and he has made a great im-
provement in that law. My Noble and Learned Friend Lord
-uemnan, the Hem. Member for Maldon (Mr. Lennard),
and mY Hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool (Mr.
• Ewart) have likewise introduced Bills to mitigate the se-
. ver,itY of the criminal code. It has always seemed to me
only proper
that when a Commission had been appointed
by the Crown to revise and consider the criminal law, they
should take into their view, in as comprehensive a manner
as
tthey could, the bearing of these different laws ; and I
all be guided by those whose opinions have been con-
rifled by former reports on this subject, and by those who
administer the laws, in respect to any further alterations
which
may remain to be made. Ido not anticipate that,
burglary,
some few exceptions, such as in the cases of arson and
the practical mitigation of the law will be carried
, , -cirFolurther than it is at present. There have been pro-
gieus changes made in our criminal law as administered
all criminal cases ; in proof of which I will read a state-
ment. of the average number of executions from the year
• ti° • Sir, the following is an account of the average
"
,o umber of
' the Persons executed at different periods from 1605
present year
:
From 1805 to 1811... average of seven years 57
1812 to 1818 ditto 9O
• 1819 to 1825 ditto B2
1826 to 1832 ditto 59
1831 to 1833 three years 46
1834 to 1836 ditto 2B
have not, Sir, I ask, most satisfactory to find that we should
.thus reduced the average number of deaths, more
eially in reference to the last seventeen or eighteen
YePears? bßut I do think it a disgrace to us to have statutes
yearwhich five hundred persons' may be condemned in one
the merciful
; and I think that the feelings of the Learned Judge,
11_,vemerciful consideration of the Crown, which was so
t:t,
ergo:lly exercised in all cases where it could be, ought
be t,
•Ilmrtetioned by Parliament, and that we ought not to
eriroulnttair other nations in mitigating the severity of our
by eve Code •, but that we ought, moreover, to endeavour
every means to prevent crime in future periods.—(Hear.)
1041er., HUME felt- highly gratified at time statement just
co by
would
the Noble Lord, and was satisfied that the whole
u
ould participate' in that feeling.
~kathe t;WART cordially approved of the measures as far
• Wks d't Went, but regretted that the principle of mitigation
be___.o carried much further, as he thought it might have
•en The
• !law -Pon the
Member was proceeding to detail his
bt co -ron the su,bject, when it was moved that the House
Abe teed but, at the solicitation of the Chancellor of
led
and Lord John Russell, the motion was