The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-25 00:00:00

FORGERY.

Mr. A. ELLIS presented petitions from St. Mary Axe
and Saltford, for less severity in the law punishing forgery.
Lord CLIFTON presented a petition with the same
prayer, from Canterbury.
Sir M. S. sTENyART begged leave to present the
petition of the subscribing Magistrates, Clergy, Bankers,
Merehants,Thwetiaurers, and other persons of the city of
Glasgow, to the number of 641, imploring this House, for
the sake of the common feelings of humanity, the moral
sentiments of the community, the regular and impartial
dispensation of justice, the consequent value and security
of property, and the avoidance of the evils resulting from
the frequent impunity of crime, to consider the propriety
of a change in the law which visits forgery with death,
and of the substitution of such other punishment, or gra-
dation of punishments, as may be deemed most consistent
with justice, and most conducive in all respects to the
public good. It was impossible that he could state too
highly the respectability and intelligence of these benevo-
leat petitioners : they consisted, as he was informed from
undoubted authority, of all the Bankers in the city of
Glasgow without a single exception, of all the Magistrates
at present resident there, of many Justices of the Peace,
of al the Established Clergy, of all the Dissenting Minis-
ters he believed, some of the Professors of the University,
and Members of other Learned Bodies, together with a
great number of those who are more immediately and per-
sonally interested, the Merchants and Manufacturers of
Glasgow. It would be superfluous in him to add any
thing to such an enumeration of those petitioners, who
bad done him the honour of placing their petition in his
bands; and he was the more anxious to enumerate an I
characterize these humane petitioners, and to show to the
House how much consideration was due to this their public
and united testimony on this deep'y important national sub-
ject, because he felt that he could nut c4nscientiously
concur with them in urging the immediate adoption
of the prayer of their philanthropic petition. For listen-
ing as lie had the good fortune to do to the luminous state-
ment of his Right Hon. Friend, on the introduction of
his Bill on a former night—and considering the vast in=
tei esti involved—and the immense and ever undulating
circulation of the country throughout all its mediums and
facilities, he could not hot feel satisfied, that in the re-
mission of the punishment of death, his Right Hon,
Friend had gone, in the first instance at least, as far as
a prudential consideration for these tnultiplie I interests
would justify, or the public opinion itself was prepared as
yet to follow him—(Hear, hear)—and he came to this
conclusion the more readily, and refrained from urging the
prayer of these most respectable petitioners with the less
reluctance, when he recollected that in the speech of his
Right Hon. Friend, to which he had alluded, lie avowed
himself to be a strong advocate (and indeed had already

proved himself such) for the mitigation of capital punish-
ment, but he wished that mitigation to be gradual,
that it might thereby be safe, and become perma-
nent.—(Hear, hear, hear. )_ln deference to the num-
bers, the station, and the liberality of these petitioners,
and the great consideration due to them, and in justice to
himself in venturing to differ from them as to the public
expediency of the immediate adoption of their wishes, he
begged the permission of the House to read one or two sen-
tences of his Right Hon. Friend's speech on the introduc-
tion of his Bill. He said, "In looking at this question, I
think it to be a most important object to diminish,
as much as possible, the number of offences to which the
punishment of death has been attached. I have indeed no
hesitation in avowing that I am a strong advocate for the
mitigation of capital punishments, but I confess I wish
that mitigation to be gradual, because I should like what
is done to be permanently disposed of. In the various ef-
forts which for years I have had the honour of making to
reform the criminal code, my principal object was always
as far as possible to remove the punishment of death from
all offences in which a less severe penalty could he inflicted
without disadvantage to the community. In looking at
the safe and steady mitigation of our criminal code of late
years, it is right to observe the careful and co-operating
principles on which we depended. So that we had the
benefit of a two-fold operation in the course we were pur-
suing. First, we began by diminishing the number of
offences punishable by death ; and we have also in these
cases where the capital penalties remained, gradually in-
flicted it with a more sparing hand, so that we have pro-
ceeded, as it were, double-handed in our work. Looking
therefore to the extent of the injury, the tremendous loss
of property, the ruin of families, and the general character
and situation of those who commit this crime, I confess I
should deprecate any sudden and entire cessation of the
punishment of death for forgery. Let us watch the
effect of the gradual abatement of the severity of the
law, which will enable us hereafter to see how
much further we can go, desirous as we are to mi-
tigate the severity of our criminal code."—(Hear, hear,
hear.)—ln these sentiments he could not but con-
cur, and with much deference and the sincerest respect
for the sentiment of the petitioners, he did not, therefore,
feel himself justified in urging upon the House or his
Right Hon. Friend, the further extension at present of the
remission of the punishment of death : for although it
might, in many instances, be true, as stated in this petition,
that the consideration of the awful consequences of a
capital conviction prevented the prosecution of offenders,
yet he believed that it was at least equally true that the
dread of the punishment of death, and of death alone,
prevented in quite as many instances, the commission of
the crime of forgery altogether.—(Hear, hear.)—And
until an adequate secondary punishment, adapted to the
habits and feelings of this country, the effect of which
public sympathy would not weaken or defeat, he dis-
covered, lie feared, it would neither be safe oriust to the pub-
lic interest to do away with the capital punishment alto-
gether. He mast sincerely hoped that such a discovery and
adaptation of an adequate secondary punishment would soon
be made. Without, therefore, presuming to make another
observation on this deeply interesting question, he would
only further ask the indulgence of the House, in consider-
ation of the weight due to the collective opinions of such
a body of enlightened petitioners, and from whom he to a
certain extent unfortunately differed, and as the petition
was very short and very well drawn, he would ask the
permission of the House, after he had got leave to bring
it up, that it be read at length at the table.—( Hear.)
Lord W. PAULETT presented a petition from the
shipowners of South Shields, against the Coal Duties.
Mr: FYLER presented a petition from Coventry, com-
plaining of the mode in which certain tenements were
rated to the poor.

Mr. DENISON presented a petition from Bermondsey,
against the Bill for passing Irish and Scotch Poor.
THE KING'S ILLNESS.—MESSAGE FROM THE