The Sun.
London, England, 1847-02-24 00:00:00

NILE OFFENDERS.

Sir JOHN PACKINGTON, in introducing a Bill for the
more Speedy trial and Punishment of Juvenile Offenders, Mid
that the want of a system of education seemed to him to be
the great cause of crime; and, therefore, he thought that as
extended system of national education ought to be enforced, in
order to prevent the growing evil. An attempt had been
made by the present Government to remedy this evil, and he
(Sir J. Packington ) would tender his heartfelt thanks to the
Noble Lord, or the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, if he could
in any way put a period to the present defective system.
He would limit himself to the second branch of the subject,
viz, the trial and punishment of juvenile offenders, and not-
withstanding the value which he set on the trial by jury, he
believed he could show the reasonableness of doing away with
it in the ease now before him, and the judiciousness of adopt-
ing summary convictions in the place of it. He would take one
instance to show the folly of retaining the trial by jury. The
circumstance occurred in the county of Worcester. A boy was
committed on the 13th November for stealing twopence, and
was not tried until the first week in January, and thus
suffered seven weeks imprisonment. There was another case
of a little girl, who had been committed for stealing a quart of
milk. In the petition submitted the other night to the House
of Lords by Lord Brougham, it was stated that out of 50,000
prisoners committed, fully 5,000 were prisoners under
fourteen years of age, and, from his own expe-
rience in the county of Somerset, he could state
that more than nne.sixth of those committed were under 16
years of age. Such was the extent of the number of the
juvenile offenders. He would now turn to a vary high autho-
rity. In the report of the inspectirs of prisons it was stated
shat there was an evident necessity for an alteration of the law
with regard to juvenile prisoners. In 1844 a Committee was
appointed, of which the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for
Tamworth was the Chairman, and one of the subjects for the
consideration of that Committee was criminal prosecutions,
and in the report which they made to the House they stated
that there was a meat need for the establishment of some
tribunal for the summary trial of young prisoners, and he
trusted the Right Hon. Baronet still entertained the same
opinions as he did at that time. The authority to which he
would turn, was one to which he attached great importance, and
which, he trusted. that her Majesty's Ministers would concur
with him in giving it the great weight, which he believed it
oo,sessed. That was the opinion of Sir Edward Ryan, who,
at the time he expressed it, was Chief Justice of India, and he
had Sir Edward Ryan's permission for using his name in saying
that he still retained the impression that it was absolutely ne-
cessary for some change being made in the process of
examining and convicting juvenile offenders; and he
thought that the doing away of the trial by jury
would be cheaply purchased by the advantages to be
obtained by the summary conviction of young offenders.
The Hon. Member then read a series of extracts from the
report of the Criminal Commissioners in 1837, all tending to
show the wisdom of giving some authority to the magistrates
for the conviction and punishment of prisoners of tender years.
charged with trivial offences. He need not say that, from the
eminent position and character of the persons from whom this
report emanated, that it was worthy of the utmost attention.
The magistrates were, indeed, at present placed under the
most cruel embarrassment, for while some of them did not
hesitate to send the young offenders brought before them to
prison for the crimes of which they were clearly guilty, others,
who were of more doubtful minds, felt themselves obliged
to send young offenders to another place for trial, and
in one instance the judge, before whom one of these offenders
was tried had sentenced a prisoner, after conviction, to one
hour's imprisonment. He held in his hand a report which
had been prepared by Mr. M. Hill for the Law Amendment
Society, and which was founded or, the returns made from tho
town of Birmingham, which went to the same effect. It had
been suggested that young offenders should be tried by small
juries at per ty sessions, in the event of their doing away with
the trials at general sessions. To this he could be no party,
for he believed that the benefit to be derived from it, saving
the contamination of a prison, would be entirely lost by that
plan. He would propose that a power should be given to two
magistrates to decide upon all cases of offenders who had com-
mitted felony while under fifteen years of age, and who were
committed for offences under forty shillings, and to adjudicate
them to six months' imprisonment. He proposed to
give to the parties so
quacrotnevricteadeasi.thase. right of
appeal to the general
than that in all cases of difficulty he would give to the magis-
trates the power of sending any offender for trial at sessions.
Such h
we a s
wast outlineaware h
otftahte
itwas planwhichopen
ohae pt o poohs
objection,
oon,
adopt,hut
but
he trusted to be allowed to bring in his Bill and
that he should have the assistance of the Govern-
ment in carrying it out ; for he felt assured, that if
this change in our criminal law were carried out through the
aid of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Home De-
partment, no Minister who had ever held the office now filled
by him could have been the means of promoting a greater
benefit than he would confer upon his country. With thanks
for the attention which he had enjoyed from the House, ho
would move for leave to bring in the Bill, and that it be read a
first time. _ _

Sir G. GREY felt grateful for the attention which had
been bestowed upon this very important subject, and though
ready t o
y impressed he would not commit himself to the principle of the Bill, he
accedefull to
its
being
with
tbrought
importancein an d ruetatdhae
wasfi rst time.qui te
He was
subject, and the Hon. Member might be assured that it would
receive the best attention of the Government.
Mr. HUME wished the Hon. Gentleman to consider whe-
ther the punishment of juveniles could not be obviated by
some improved system of education. He did not join in the
opinion the Hon. Gentleman had expressed that great improve-
ments had taken piece in the present system of education. For
his part he could not discover where the impruvement had
taken place, and he regretted, and believed the country joined
him in that regret, that Government had not brought forward
an extensive system of national education. Government was
alone to blame for the present anomalies of the law. It was
monstrous to punish a boy or a girl with several months' im-
prisonment for stealing an article scarcely of the value of 2d.
They claimed to be a civilised country ; but he would venture
to say, that in a country they were pleased to style as barbarous,
he meant China, there was no such abonainahl. system.
Mr. SHAW did not agree with that part of the Bill which
related to appeals ; but with regard to its other provisions,
speaking generally, he agreed with them.
Colonel T. WOOD said education was not sufficient to re-
form the system. Something more was required to prevent
juvenile crime, and he would suggest that Government, at the
public expense, should build a number of penitentiaries in dif-
terent parts of the country, where juvenile offenders should be
kept distinct from other offenders. At present the good was
mixed up with the bad, and the consequence was, juvenile
offenders never were reclaimed.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
CHARITABLE BEQUESTS.
Lord JOHN M ANNERS moved for leave to bring in a Bill
to amend the law relating to the disposition of property for
pious and charitable trusts. The chief provisions of the Bill
would be comprised in a clause requiring that all wills
bequeathing property for charitable or pious purposes should
be signed three months before the death of the testator, and a
clause providing that all landed property bequeathed for the
same purposes should be converted into funded property.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said the Bill was very similar to one
the Noble Lord had unsuccessfully brought forward on a
former occasion, but the improvements ;he Noble Lord had
inttoduced into the present one though not inconsiderable,
were not sufficient to mitigate his objection to the Bill. He
should, however, not divide the House upon the present occa-
sion, but leave the measure to be fully and amply discussed on
the second reading.
Sir GEORGE GREY expressed his approbation of the
alterations but he was bound to add that he did not think they
were sufficiently extensive. He would, however, reserve his
objections for the second reading.
Mr. COLLETT wished to know whether the Noble Load
had intk titled that the fact of the will not being signed three
months previous to the death of the testator sl.ould invalidate
the will generally?
Lord JOHN MANNERS said that the will would be in-
validated only as regarded the bequests for charitable purposes.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.
CHARGES AGAINST OFFICERS IN THE WOOL-