The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-11 00:00:00

be a division qaestiin, but should it 1y.7,
that, ti:cre coi:1,1 be a. uivisicu, he shoull certainly cute

egs!est the msesere
Sir J. GRAHAM said he hid been anxious before
to address the f-louse neon this isep trtaet subject,
and he was only pr. vented from doing so by an acsi-
dent. He had, front his former official position, been
able to collect some information upon this subject,
and he was, therefore, particularly anxious to,
hike part in this debate. In the very outset
he must express his regret, that her Ma-
jesty's Government had not brought forward this
measure in such a form as to give the House an oppor-
tunity of expressing a direct opinion upon it. Now,
with regard to the first clause of this Bill, which gave
power to the Crown to transfer the convicts of Ireland to
this country, he most decidedly objected to it. The
Lord Chief Justice of Ireland had expressed himself
against it, and there could be no doubt that the clause
would prove highly injurious. What effect would im-
prisenteoet have upon an Irish convict; hut, above all,
what effect would it produce, by !ettin the convict
loose upon society in Ireland after the expiration of his
' time of imprisonment.—(Heate hear.) He entertained
no less objection to the other clauses of the measure,
and particularly to that clause which transferred the pa-
tronage and control of the prisons of this country from
the Secretary of State to the Prison Commissioners. It
would trenster the responsibility from a Member of the
Government, holding a seat in that House, to these
Commissioners, who could not be present in that House
to give any explanations that might be required of them.
But these matters of detail could be disposed of in Com-
mittee. The real matter for them was to
consider the question of transportation (Hear,
hear)—and here he could not bit join in
the reeret expressed by his Honourable Friend the
Member for the University, that her Majesty's Govern-
ment head net brought this question forward in a more
fermal shape. Now with regard to this question of
,ranspertation he must admit that at the time he left
thee he felt that the period had arrived when it was
necessary to suspend transportatior, at least he felt
that the extent to which transportation had been carried
for the previous five years, must necessarily be sus-
pended. He should, therefore, have been prepared now
to support a plan for suspending that mode of secondary
punishment, but the House was not called upon to
eonsider the question of suspension. They were called
upon to consider its abolition rather than its suspension,
avid lie certainly was not prepared to support such a
eropesal.—(hear, hear.) Before proceeding further he
could not help adverting to a most important topic, to
which his Hon. Friend the Member for the University
had also addressed himself. What, asked his Hon. Friend,
was the state of the administrath n of the penal la. s
'it this moment, upon the clue administration of which
depended the safety of life and property in this country?
(Hear, hear.) It hai been the policy of modern times—
,' policy which he approved of—to temper the rigour of
the criminal law—to administer justice with greater
mercy than formerly, and to mitigate the sanguinary
-pi: it which once characterised the criminal code of this
country. He might say, speaking generally, that except
et the case of the crime of murder, capital punishment
had latterly been inflicted on no criminal, but he could
not conceal from the House the fact, that in
proportion to the mitieation of the punishment there
had been a corresponding increase in crime. The
entries which ha'l been prepared by the Home-office,
proved this. Iu 1829, capital punishment was remitted
with regard to the crime of forgery. In that year the
number of commitments for forgery was 321. In the
year 1841, the commitments were 514, and in the year
1846 they were 706, showing an increase of nearly
double. The crime of arson ceased to be capital in the
year 1827. In that year the number of commitments
"sere 31. In 1836 they were 366, and in 1846 they
ruse to 581, being an increase of somewhere about 60
per cent. Again. with regard to that remarkably at-
trocious crime of rape, which ceased to be capital in 1841.
In teat year the commitments were 319, but in 1846
hey amount, d to 597, being an increase of 90 per cent.
Now did not these figures convince them that they ought
to be cautious in their dealings with this question of
,ransportation ? The only secondary punishment that
could be substituted for capital punishment was
transportation for life, and yet the House
was called upon to abolish even that. What could they
substitute for it ? Nothing but imprisonment and soh-
eary confinement. But in the application of solitary
confinement there was required great caution and in-
spection ; and even then it must be viewed with some
jealousy.—(Hear, hear.) He had, therefore, arrived
at the conclusion that life and property would be ren-
dered more unsafe than they were at present, if the
punishment of transportationwereselt"gether abolished.
and he seriously prayed the Government and the House
to exercise extreme caution in dealing with this matter.
He would wish, then, to ask, should a change like this
ae made unless by Act of Parliament ?—(Hear, hear.)
The Act of the sth of George the Fourth did not place
any prerogative in the Crown to change the punishment,
but rather left it in its power to superadd imprisonment.
What was the punishmentahat they intended ai adopt
tf th.y abolished transportation ? Lord Demean, whose,
epinion had been recd to the House, and wild ales) spoke
the epiinons of his brsthren, deprecated thelbelition
reespertatien. The Justice Clerk. theghitteCeminoe
Judge in Scotland, said, that he regard4:the punish.
eient as most valuable; that nettling could compensate
for its loss; and that it would be most prejudicial to,
contract the class of if •nces to Widish it -- was
-at present circumscribed. Ile would not weary, th,
House by reading, the opinion of the Chief Justice it
Ireland. ['he Right Hon. Baronet than read the opinion.
which stated that he had no objection to eitiplo., ing the
,criminal upon public workt; as a temporary expedient.
He considered that convicts of the better class, and those
engaged in unleetul associations, appeared most to dread
it. The plan, since its first introduction. had undergone
a considerable change, for it w,s contemplated at the
end of the imprisonment, the criminal show(' ,be exiles
under Act of Parliament, but since that part of the sys-
tem had been abandoned, it w..s steels es. to argue it far-
ther. But very severe observes ems had been
passed upon Lord Brougham for his speech upon
the measure, but he agreed with Lord Brougham
and he considered that originally the plan was epee
to all the objections which he had urged. Such a
system would have shocked all civilised Europe. Now.
what was the change proposed? "Deportation," why
that would involve all the expenses of a penal colony.
They should have cenvict establishments, convict ships,
and convict superintendents. It they adopted the sepa-
rate system, they would not have separate cells to
confine the criminals, for the convictions of even one
twelve months four thousand five hundred separate cell's
would hardly be sufficient. But he would go on to
prove that this plan was not new, it had been
tried, had been found to have tailed, and did
not prevent crime by inspiring dread.—(Hear, hear.)
and had also been condemned by that House, lie would
real to them the opinion of the Justice Clerk, whe
of the Learned
jrzeipaohrtt
oupon
Baronetiai experimentd at
hs
emade
words i n Perth. The
.Judge to whom he referred:—" The separate system
which was at first looked upon with alarm, has now
utterly failed to prevent offenders from again committing
crime." He had stated that the plan was not new, that
it had failed, and that it was condemned by that House.
He would, therefore, read the able report of the Com-
mittee appointed in 1832, to report upon secondary
pitnishmeet, which condemned the system in very strong
language. What was the great evil of society in
France ? Why, this very system of secare!ary punish
ment, which threw back the criminals upon society after
the short term of their pueishment. This was admitted
by all her stet,- smen and politicians, and they should
take care how they adulated a plan which had
been found in other countries so prejudicial.
He would also show the House the danger of precipitate
legislation. It was supposed that the great difficulty
was the want of labour in Van Diemee's Land. He had
received a letter from a person of the highest authority,
who assured him that the want of labour was not at pre-
sent felt, and that in a short time the colony would be
clamouring for more convicts. They might mitigate
the sentence on those who had behaved themselves
well; but what was to be done with those who hail
not? Would they imprison them, or transport them for
life? It was a question fraught with the greatest diffi-
culties. He had thought it his duty frankly to point out
the difficulties; and he was perfectly ready to go into
Committee with the Bill, and to suggest amendment,
whilit it was in that state, if the Government
would state that during the recess they
would take the whole subject of seconder>
punishment into consideration, and bring
iormed a metsure next session, with the view of porma-
ne• tly sealing the nature of that punishment. He was
desirous that the Crown should retains the prerogative
it had hit .erto exeicised ; but, at this same time, he was
most uhwilline that the law should remain in an uncer
tam and undefined state ; and, therefore, on this
understanding he should support the Bill.
though he c insider- d it of minor important.,
compared with the great question involve d in this dis
cussion. I.t la; itiging forward such a measure he would
glaely give them every facility and aid in his power to
m the difficulties of the present moment.
Mr. C. BULLER felt at any time and on every sub-
ject great difliuult.y in arresting the attention of the
House in risine after the Right Honourable Gen
(lumen, who, on this occasien, had brought for-
ward his great experience to bear upon the question
before the Reuse. Toe measure had been fatly criti
(died, but no Hon. Member had suggested a better plan.
But surely no one was so able to deal with the sub,
ject Si well as the Hon. Gentleman who was connected
with the Government during the administration of
which, ail the difficulties with which they %ere now deal-
ing arose.—(Hear, hear.) The late Government sus-
pended transportation altogether, as it was expressly
stipulated that it should be discontinued to New South
Wales, Van Diemen's Land. Sleuth Australia—
Leal NIAtiON-- Norfolk Island ?
Mr. C. BULLER—Yes, it was also suspended to Nor-
folk Island. tie gave the Noble Lord the full benefit ol
that, as he believed no one, after the accounts which had
been received from the island, would wish to see trame
eerie; ion to that quarter con:inned.—(Hear, hear.) It
was also discononut d to New Zealand, as an express
stipulation was made by the English settlers that ne
convicts should be sent there. Well, transportation
being suspended to these places, he was at a loss to know
to what place they could continue to send transports
The Ri4lit II ,nourahle Baronet asked where that
would find tells ? hut, in reply, he would also
,il.lll,,,,,,siis,tnrabl
ato,,de Baronet expected
asktttr)ailfis npW(Oihret cells t:
twore the lci4rhi
Right
purr,i)tiif,s,t,hdebsyutsiili,e.,iltasitteanG4o:.
vertunent ? Ile (Mr. Buil, r) did tee tilanw the late Go-
vernment for die c'airse they ,iad adopted, but he asked
the II ,use to extend the same indulgence to the present
Government as they did to the Government which pre-
cedsd them. When he present Government came int,
offiese they were compelled, without de av, to decide
the veurse which they would adept, and he thought they
acted wisely i a acting as they had done. The Nigh!
' Hon. Baronet said that secondary punishment should be
brought to an intelligible point. The present discipline