The Sun.
London, England, 1853-10-17 00:00:00

Ztb. -41E1.V*14

LONDON, MONDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1853.

In order that the recent Act for the protection
of women and children should be fairly tested—
in order that the Legislature should be willing
on a fitting occasion to extend its operation, so as
effectually to suppress the brutal and unmanly
offences against which it was directed, it is essen-
tial that its stringent provisions should be dis-
creetly, as well as vigorously, resorted to. Magis-
trates are thereby armed with extraordinary
powers—powers directly opposed to the constitu-
tional principle, that " No man should be deemed
guilty of any offence until found to be so by the
verdict of twelve of his peers." Until that trial
had taken place, no penalty could legally be in-
flicted. The party accused might be subjected to
imprisonment, but that could only be for safe'
.custody, not for punishment, and he had a com-
mon law right to be brought to trial on the
first opportunity, unless adequate grounds could
be assigned for postponement. A summary
jurisdiction was subsequently conferred, and
from time to time extended, in order to ensure a
certain degree of punishment in cases where there
might otherwise be a failure of justice. The
power was, however, vigilantly guarded. Magis-
trates were only enabled to sentence for common
assaults to pecuniary fines, or in default of pay-
ment to a short term of imprisonment. If the
crime was attended with aggravated circumstances
so as to render the pecuniary penalty inadequate,
the presiding Justice was authorised to commit
the prisoner for trial ; and whenever the facts
were doubtful, it was his duty to do so, that the
great Palladium of British liberty might not be
unduly interfered with. After some time an act
was passed for the protection of the police, who in
the discharge of their arduous duties were but too
frequently subjected to wanton and a ferocious
assaults by drunken ruffians. In such cases where
a policeman on actual duty was the victim, the
Magistrate was authorised to pass a sentence of
imprisonment for any term not exceeding two
raonths, without the option of a money fine. The
Act was, however, passed on the understanding
that its provisions should only be called into ope-
ration where no possible doubt or difficulty arose
as to the guilt of the accused. And we conceive
that, in such cases, is entitled, ex debito justitce, as
a matter of unquestionable right, to demand a
trial before a jury rather than a summary adju-
dimtion. When such a privilege existed, so that
the accused could not possibly be prejudiced, the
Paimmary jurisdiction might safely be allowed—it
was only nominally, but not really, in violation of
the great constitutional principle "Trial by Jury."
One class of cases, however, arose, in which it
was
deemed essential to infringe still further on
the constitutional privilege above referred to. It
was found that personal assaults, committed by
truculent scoundrels on members of their own fa-
min', had been fearfully on the increase, until they
had arrived at such an unprecedented height
as to have an
irresistible claim on legislative at-
tention. Truculent scoundrels, who made a
practice of spending the greater portion of the a
earnings in low profligacy and bitually ill-treated dissipation, ha-
their - miserablef partners—
whether wives or mistresses
o the purpose of
preventing just reproaches o:
gratifying their
own vindictive and malevolent
fee Their
helpless children were also kicked linos.abOut or vio-
lently beaten without cause or provocation. The
punishment, by a pecuniary fine, was clearl in-
the
adequate for such horrible outrages. It alsoy
great majority of instances, fell on the inno-
cent victims, inasmuch as it was the furniture or
savings of the afflicted wife that went to pay for
this injury she had herself sustained. Nor was a
committal for trial more efficacious, as the sufferer
was easily induced to absent herself from the
trial, so that the offenders escaped with practical
impunity, the majesty of the law remained unvin-
dicated, and was brought into contempt and dis-
repute.

To meet this formidable and rapidly-increasing
evil the Act of last session was passed ; and Ma-
gistrates were empowered to sentence to six
months' bard labour for assaults on women or
children of tender years. It was under considera-
tion whether the further power cf inflicting cor-
poral punishment should not also be granted, but
that was withheld, chiefly because serious doubts