The Sun.
London, England, 1830-06-23 00:00:00

London and Middlesex, From the rest of England and
Wales; for the proportion of executions in London
and Middlesex have been considerably greater in
London and Middlesex, than in the rest of England
and Wales. If the penalty of death was necessary
to deter persons from this crime, you would find
that towards the end of this period, it would have
had the effect of reducing crime to a greater degree
in London and Middlesex, than in the test of Eng-
land and Wales. I am aware that crimes, such as
forging, must exist to a greeter extent in capitals
than in the country ; but what I am going to do is,
to compare London and Middlesex with London and
Middlesex, and England and Wales with England
and Wales. In the last seven years there have
been in England and Wales 383 Committals, and
24 executions, for forgery; and in London and Mid-
dlesex there have been, in the like period, 80 com-
mittals, 40 convictions, and 15 executions; so that
these •proportions give a considerably different re-
sult; fir, notwithstanding the much larger propor-
tion of executions, the commission of the crime has
considerably increased in London and Middlesex,
whereas in England and Wales it had scarcely in-
creased at all. With respect to Ireland, your Lord-
ships will find that the case is still stronger ; for in
that country, during the last seven years) there have
been no executions whatever for forgery; and yet,
under the circumstance of there having been no exe-
cution, and that paper circulation, and consequently
temptation, is very great there, I do not find any
increase in the crime. On the contrary, there is a
diminution; for, in 1823, the number of persons
charged with this offence amounted to 53, and in
1829, there were only 41. But it is not on the
case of forgery alone that we are able or required
to discuss the effett produced by the penalty of
death. There have been two material changes
made within the range of our own legislation : in
one of these instances the penalty of death has been
withdrawn; and in the other the penalty of trans-
portation, not previously existing, has been enacted :
and I beg to call on your Lordships to look at the
effects produced in both these cases. In the first
case (I mean that which has reference to the law of
excise) ne have the evidence of the most important
witness on the subject--a gentleman who may have
been known (for he is now dead) to many of your
Lordships. I allude to Mr. Carr, the late Solicitor of
Excise. Mr. Carr, in his evidence, stated that the
act of counterfeiting stamps in certain cases of ex-
cise was, before 1806, only liable to a fine of 5001.;
but in that year it was made a transportable offence,
and what was the consequence ? From 1794 to
1806 there were nineteen convictions out of twenty-
one prosecutions, while from the year 1806 to 1818
there were only three convictions out of nine pro-
secutions ; so that, presuming that the latter prose-
cutions were instituted on the same grounds as the
former ones, the infliction of this heavier penalty had
the effect of diminishing the convictions. Now with
respect to the case of withdrawing the punishment
of death, I beg your Lordships to see how that
stands. The offence that lam alluding to is that of
stealing in bleachina-houses. That has ceased to
be a capital crime, but there has been no increase
in its commission in consequence. The re-
turns from Lancaster show that there have
been fewer crimes committed of that sort, and
Mr. 13ourne, one of the Clerks of the Peace
in 'Ulster, had stated that for the first five years
before the alteration of the punishment, out of 61
committals, there were only three convictions, while
for the first five years after, out of 37 committals
there were 17 convictions; so that this efficient ad-
ministration of the law has been assisted by a reduc-
tion of the punishment. In returns relating to the
subje, t of forgery, the proof was still more con-
vincing, for, from returns for nine years, ending in
1828, out of 708 capital charges, 334 got off;
whereas, with respect to minor charges, out of .558,
only 57 got off. Now, they could not suppose that
capital charges were brought forward on higher
grounds or less suspicious proofs than minor offences,
and I therefore ask how this circumstance can be
interpreted other than that in the one case the law
was efficiently administered, and that in the other
there was an indisposition somewhere toward the
due execution of the law. I have likewise with me,
though I shall not detain your Lordships by reading
them, an extensive correspondence with bankers
and merchants, which enumerates case on case in
whieh parties hare been de'erred from prosecuting,
and left individmls to enjoy their dishonest gains
with impunity, from reluctance to proceed against
them capitally. But let it not be said this result
affects only the case of those individuals who thus
obtain from prosecuting, and are thus justly de-
prived of redress, because a moment's considera-
tion will satisfy your Lordships that the effects of
that reluctance to proceed must extend the mischief
in a wider circle, and expose whole masses of indi-
viduals to the depredations of those, who, having
found impunity in the first instance, continue their
course, and make others their prey. Amongst
others I have the case of a father, who being in-
duce," not to prosecute, the criminal next proceeded
to commit the same depredation or. the son, and he
also declining to prosecute, the offender was finally
hanged for committing a forgery on another indivi-
dual. Indeed many such cases might be advanced
to prove that the present severity of the punish-
meat has been the cause of perfecting offenders in
the ways of guilt. Another evidence, to which 1
must appeal, is to be drawn from the number of
petit ions now I)ing on your Lordships' table ; and
inasmuch as they are applicable to one branch of
the 1311—I mean that of negociable securities.

think they must have a convincing weight with your
Lordships, because they come from parties who are
most interested in that matter. Among those peti-
tions is one to which I would particularly direct the
attention of your Lordships, as it comes from three
of the first dealers in negociable securities in the
city of London. In order that the thing may be
fully understood, I will name the individuals—they
are Mr. Sanderson, Mr. Gurney, and Mr. Rothschild.
These names, your Lordships will see, are the names
of men influenced by no consideration connected with
the pi inciples of any religious sect or party ; for one
of them is a member of the Church of England,
another a Dissenter, and the third is a Jew—men
influenced by no motives excepting those which
have a reference to, and arise out of, a knowledge
of their own affairs. They are men peculiarly en-
gaged with negociable securities, exercising the
occupation of bill brokers—a class of persons who
discount bills, and then carry them to bankers for
the purpose of obtaining cash at a lower rate of in-
terest than they themselves receive—the bankers
deriving the advantage of their security. They
are therefore emphatically dealers in securities—
dealers in responsibility. No body of men in the
whole country have a deeper interest in preventing
the crime of forgery—no body of men have better
means than those which they possess of making
themselves acquainted with the best and most effec-
tual mode of accomplishing that object. One of
those very men passes through his hands annually,
no less than between twenty and thirty millions, in
negociable securities, and the gross amount which
annually passes through the hands of the three must
exceed sixty millions. On a question of this sort,
then, you could not have higher authority. I had
also the honour of presenting to this House a peti-
tion signed by a large proportion of the country
bankers of the United Kingdom. That, too, is a peti-
tion highly deserving of respect and attention, and no
doubt it is an authority to which great weight isjustly
teteched,for they are, like the other three I have men-
tioned, men peculiarly conversant with the subject, in-
deed the most so of any men in society. The last con-
sideration to which I shall direct your Lordships' at-
tention is, whether under the present Bill the penalty
of death can be inflicted at all fur the crime, or ra-
aer whether it will be inflicted. I have stated to
you the scruples which in every religious sect arid in
every class of society exist against putting this pe-
nalty into execution, and I have stated to you also
the opinions entertained with respect to prosecutions
under the law as it at present stands—impunity then
is secured to the delinquent from the effect of thOe
set tiple. he objections, however, to this punish-
ment do 1143 treat upon the authority of persons wtio