The Sun.
London, England, 1863-01-17 00:00:00

Mr. Recorder Cox on Crimes and Punishment.

(From the Western Daily News.)
We have received a full report of the charge of the Re-
corder of Falmouth, E. W. Cox, Esq., to the grand jury,
at the Quarter Sessions for that borough, held last week.
As it contains some original views of the questions now
agitating the public, we give it entire :
Gentlemen of the Grand Jury,—D taring the last quarter
the public mind has been much agitated on the subject of
crime and punishment—from the Bench, by grand juries,
and in the press opinions have been freely offered ; and
having myself some experience as a magistrate, and given
some thought to it long before the general discussion
began, and arrived at some definite conclusions, differing in
many respects from others, I follow the example that has
been everywhere set from the judgment-seat in the charge
to the grand jury, and add my mite to the controversy.
But first, gentlemen, I am desirous of disabusing your
minds of the belief universally entertained, that crime is
generally increasing. It is not so. On the contrary, it is
and for a long time past has been steadily decreasing. The
judicial statistics prove this beyond question. I have ana-
lysed these with care, and I am pleased, as you will be, to
find that, as compared with 1860, the crimes of 1861 had
decreased by 12 per cent., and as compared with 1858, by
nearly 30 per cent. The unfavourable change has been in
the character of crime. Of late there have been more
crimes of violence, or rather, I should say, a particular
form of theft has come into fashion with the thieves, be-
cause it was found to be more safely committed than the
more stealthy methods previously in vogue. But such forms
of crime_ are committed by a worse kind of criminals.
Upon inquiry whence they came, it was found that the per-
petrators were for the most part professional criminals,
who had been previously convicted more than once, and,
going a step further, it was asked why punishment had
failed to reform or to deter them ? This led to an exami-
nation of the existing system of convict discipline, and then
it appeared that we have been trying to reform rather than
to punish ; that the attempt was a failure ; and that a new
system must be tried ; and the controversy is now reduced
to this—What substitute shall be provided for that which.
has been unanimously condemned ? Having watched the
working of the system, and given much thought to it for
several years past, my conviction is that the foundation of any
reform must be a change in the classification of criminals,
At present they are classified according to the crime, which.
is not always the measure of moral degradation ; for a man,
under the impulse of sudden great temptation or passion,
may commit a crime which the law rightly designates as a
great one, and yet be far from being so bad a character as
another criminal who has committed a crime far less in de-
gree. It is plain that we cannot righteously inflict the sane
kind of punishment upon both; there may be hope of re-
pentance and reform for the one, but of none with the other.
Therefore, I say that as soon as the sentences are passed
which the law inflicts upon the several crimes, a new classi-
fication must be made for the purpose of administering that
punishment, and there are three obvious divisions, viz. :-
Ist, the casual criminals ; 2d, the dangerous crimi-
nals ; 3d, the incorrigible criminals. The first,
or casual, criminals, should comprise all who are not
criminals by profession, who have been induced by
sudden temptation, or who are convicted for the
first time. To these there should bo offered every possible
inducement to repent and reform, and every opportunity to
restore themselves to the society they have injured, when
the prospect of amendment is offered by good conduct. The
second, or dangerous class, should comprise those who are
so controlled by their passions that they are liable to be
mastered by them. These should be treated as what, in
in fact, they are, persons mentally diseased, and kept under
proper treatment until they can safely be trusted abroad.
The third, the incorrigible criminals, are those that are
causing our present troubles. Hitherto we have been,
attempting to reform them. We must abandon that hope.
and deal with them as men who would certainly return to
crime as soon as discharged from the prison doors. Now, we
must not shrink from the consequences of this conclusion
the only remedy is to exclude them for ever front the
community upon which they prey. There are but two
means of doing this—either banishment or imprisonment.
Formerly we banished them. We have abandoned that
natural cure for the disease, on the assertion that there is
no place on the earth's face to which we could send them.
Our colonies will not take them, and we must not create
new colonies for the purpose. As for the first assertion k
is not true, for I heard Governor Kennedy say that in
Western Australia they would be glad to take from us any
number of convicts; and as to the other assertion, I
would answer it by saying, what our fathers did we can
do. They created convict colonies, and those colonies,
under their new names, are not sinks of iniquity, nor hells
upon earth, but among the most flourishing and most cre-
ditable of our possessions; and why should we be unable
to do again what, was done before successfully? But if it
should turn out that we cannot transport, how should we
treat them at home I' They must be looked upon as one-, tures who have forfeited all their social rights, and made
the slaves of the community they have wronged. Hard
work on public works should be their lot, and they should
fare precisely according to their labour. That is the lot
of the honest man; why should the criminal be exempted
from it? If he won't work he must not eat; if he will
work for them he should have comforts, and the stimulus
of hope might be offered by allowing him to work out his
freedom. I might enlarge this question by details, but
this is not the plan for them. My purpose now is only to
submit to you the principles that, as it appears to me, ought
to regulate the punishment of our convicts. I think, too,
that something might be done in the way of prevention.
The professional criminals are known, and returns are
actually made of them. Why should they not be called
upon to account for their manner of life ? There would be
no real danger to liberty in giving this power to magis-
trates; for the honest man would have no difficulty in
showing that he was obtaining his livelihood honestly. A.
commission has been appointed to inquire into this subject ;
and let us trustthat it may arrive at satisfactory conclusions.