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

tatin. The opinion or the judges on this qua tier was
to be beeninto consideration, for he dd net agree with
what
Was
said of these rearm d fuee t. cif s.
because
that their opinion wes net to be sa.'ued,
titheysethi'Y were men cf such microscopic eyes.
that
could not comprehend any great e-übj. ct.
'else
Jdges,. he believed, with the exception ot. Judge
rerrin, tore in favour of transperteeion, and had de-
clared that no description of imprisonment would be en
tilficient substitute for transportation. The Hon. Member
e queted the expressed opinion of Lord Denman, Mr.
wastice Wightman Mr. Justice Erle,and the Scotch Judges
,
who deprecated the abolition of transportation. In
Ireland to which he would now come, there was no part
of the United Kingdom where the operation of this
measure would be so injurious, where the punish-
ment of transportation was so much dreaded. The
strop"sn Judges had expressed their opinion very
toglY in favour of transportation In short,
his mind, no opinion could be so conolueive
Peinst imprisonment as the opinion of Chief Justice
nnefather. He is not merely opposed to impris,in-
trent, but equally against the system of solitary inapri-
"Ment. Solitary imprisonment was, above all, hideous
and odious to human nature. He had seen the model
system of Philadelphia, and it disgusted him. The
2,8t4111 was tried in England with every effort to make it
u—ecieede and yet what had been the consequences ? 1)r.
r 'Y and his colleague report, as the consequences o'
the
mYsterne most evident symptoms of incipient insanity,
the first appearance of the mind yielding beneath the
c'eateeent. In many instances these symptoms had beer.
'natured into confirmed insanity. This system had been
established in almost every state in America ; it was
rpular upon its introduction ; but after having been
:tiled, it alas almost universally abolished in favour ot the
it`.e._tit system. He regretted to hear the Secretary of
Say that the Government had determined to adept
a mode of punishment the most horrible to
nue
and such as human nature could not
Why, he asked, if they were to
follow the example of America, should they begin at the
wrong end? Why should this country not profit by th.
tl'erience of America? He had quoted the opinions 01
Judges upon the other system. now did they speak in
boon to the silent system? Thirty-one judges had
,312 consulted; twenty-three said they had no means of
Judging of the system; four were adverse, and tour spoke.
javour. He was surprised that they could hesitate.
Zuen facts before them were such as rentonville exid
ted, and as had been witnessed among the convict,
1:
prostrated—often
out from that prison. Often the physical nature was
oeltrated—often the mind was debased and brutal.
ite
", if it was not bereft of reason entirely.
...,Ee Must say, that when such evidence lay upon th•
and when he had known of his own knowledge
that the separate system had tailed in America, he Lope,
tha
her
Ara Majesty's Government would pause before the)
Dosed this silent system upon the whole country ; it
daa done in ignorance of the nature of man. When
cd had placed man in the world, and had tested his
sllPeriority, he said, "it is not good for man to be
a
to
°lP."—(Laughter.) He saw some Members inclined
to 'ugh, he did not think that that was a proper way
treat the authority v-hich he had quoted. He censi-
itlered that the present proposition was a false step which
4
been made; for a Liberal Government who b .asted
eit regard the popular voice, for that Government tee
kt,tlge a system against the popular wish was a most
eitrary proceeding. The Right II ,n. Baronet had
iltpleined transportation to be only placing the cri eie.
0 ,the disposal of her Majesty's Government. Let them
e.a,IY imagine a clergyman passing sentence upon a cri-
"'mal ; let him say, you John Thomas have been con-
eenvicted of a heinous crime, and it is my duty to pass
on YOU the severest penalty of the law, namely, to place
Youtst the disposal of her Majesty's Government. Would
e
t t•
hat be a most lame and lamentable conclusion ; it
pasunsettle the public mind. And if an Irishman
e'.141 the person sentenced, he would say, why such a pu-
felahenfent is not worse than being made a chalk clerk,
err_ be is at the disposal of her Majesty's Government.
tothat if her Majesty's Ministers persevered
th this measure that they would forfeit the confidence of
exteoPle.
eb‘.l.• M. MILNES supported the Bill; they had tried
Sy- 'Meal of penal punishment in the colonies under
it erY possible phase and they had failed, and therefore
43,:tfeasta.reise in the Government to introduce a new
He believed that they had failed in conse-
quence of the distance of the colony, and not from any
bLank of those in office. he system of assignment would
e the life blood of the colony to its very fountain,
.easteea,a the very worst possible regulation that could be
lured—it was fraught with evil and ruin. Transpor-
ID°de might, and did appear to be, a very admirable
°de
Itoti °I getting
,rid of offenders in the eyes of toreige
ont, but they soon began to discover that it betrayed
brtal disregard of the interests not only of the colony itself.
ule or the future welfare of the unfortunates themselves
° would not detain the House longer, but conclude b)
eilpressing his thanks to her Majesty's Government for
tie; attempt to change the present system of transporta-
wce There was one subject, however, to which he
sued to direct the attention of the Right lion.
Abet was
the Secretary for the Home Department, namely,
'Nucitt Was to .be done with those prisoners who hae
teeeergcne the full term of imprisonment, and were
eeeY to be discharged. The number of recommitted,
most erroneous—many o' the prisoners having beet.
40,1" to be recommitted four, five, six, ten, and a
Isespit times, and there had been some cases where
001c,,Mittals had occurred to the incredible number et
oecusegces. Surely this was an immense evil, and should
cle,til a considerable share or attention, with a view to
gavel° some measure for the prevention of such a
7hf things. He knew the objections which might
one tragt
see mht ainst him with regard to the bet.,
de " against
su
ed to have some weight, was, that it the\
the aroured to improve the condition of the criminal,
be whoY bad cdoUl make his condition better than
chug of tose
ommitted no crime, and would, in equehnce,
holding
Thisout a premium upon the commission of crime.
had treg however, was unsound ; but even if it
weret re at
trthoseesaunitm:llll et 18
t Particle of truth, he thought they should
treated creatures as repentant sinner,
joy for one
for the ninetyinath: other world, where there was more
• wh° had changed from his evil courses than,
Rear, hear.) nine who had never gone astray.—
' this measure, sod would wouki support the Government
further hoped to see the day when some
reforms of a more extensive nature would be in-
"Z. ced on the subject of criminal punishment.
41. r. P. MILES said that it was not a question of the
that of transportation, but of the amelioration o'
at Punishment, which was involved in the present
Question. He considered that the change, at present
proposed, was a hazardous experiment. It became rip-
. oPear.Y, therefore, for them to consider how the system
transportation had worked in the penal colonies.
iel.leY had one system carried out there in 1840. Cap
Z`,ln Macconochie had changed that system for one ot
Vll(lceas and mercy, and that seain had been chaged
r7e another superintendence le'y Major Child, sort that
• itee continual changes prevented any plan from having
tuba fair trial. In some of these plans the effect wits
heleer to exclude hope from the criminal, than t
‘.4 out a prospect of his bettering his condition.
• i'altaproved conduct. The Hon. Member for Warwick
Saitr that the judges were against the abolition ot
ansportation, but he was of a different opinion, and
foughtheld he could show from the evidence which he
d his hands that this was not the case. The Hon.
It If:fiber then read the opinions of Baron Alderson.
all Rolle, Baron Parke, and Mr. Justice Patterson.
Stillof: whom were of opinion' that the punishment should
h_oe carried into effect for aggravated offences and
ar of a more serious nature. He wished the question
inoren more carefully considered, and that if it was
tended to abolish the punishment of transportation, is
had been introduced for that purpose. He thought
the• proposed plan was adding the premium of cruelty
the common offences, and from his own experi-
ence of the salutary effects of the punishment in
crime he could not vote for its abo-
Itl°n• He prayed the Government to consider
what they were doing, and as long as they had free in-
tlePendent labourers, not to employ on the public works
convicted criminals. The Hon. Gentleman then quoted
the opinions of the governors of several prisons, to show
the effect of transportation as a secondary punishment
an deterring crime. He did not, however, approve
of the entire mode at present adopted, of carrying out
the punishment of transportation in the penal colonies ;
but notwithstanding the evils of the system, he thought
the punishment should not be ab-lished altogether.
Sir R. INGLIS gave the Government credit for the
best intentions in the proposed plan. but he regretted
that this step should be taken without more careful
• i ration and somewhat stronger authority to sup-
"ll3There re
Port it than had been brought forward. e w
thirteen of the judges voting against the abolition of the
Punishment, and he believed Mr. Justice Perrin was
the only judge who had expressed an opinion in favour
of the abolition of the punishment. The Hen. Gentle
raane the Under Secretary for the Colonies had q toted
the_opinion of Baron Alderson in favour of the abolition

ot' the punishment, but he thought that he (Sir R.
Inglis) could show from his evidence that this was no,
the case.
~,Mr- B. HAWES said that he had not quoted Baron
'Alderson to that effect.
, Sir R INGLIS understood that he had quoted him
14,,,,, an authority, in favour of the abolition of the punish-
' "enti. At any rate they had the opinions of all the
"„„,tea of England and Scotland against the abolition,
tlith the exception of Mr. Justice Perrin, and even he
' ought there were some crimes of an aggravated na-
tnlire, in regard to which it should not be abolish. d.
ske fully agreed with the Hon. Member for Somer,et-
,Vi!e, that they should not, in consequence of the evils
414ich at present accompanied the system of traniporta-
t"on abolish it altogether. The Hon. Member for Man-
ester had stated
that his quotation from Scripture had
treated with ridicule, bat he (Sir &Inglis) thought
qt:Lottahteione"hl3
then
undertake to say, that it was not at the
Tt the ridicule was direi.ted, but at the subse-
el:: -. . a PPlication of it.—(Hear, bear.) He would now
.ud r 4, m..:_
ar'''n to the titsopions and the practices of the
jProgneolletend. he would sk could the ju gee legally
terms ~ - sentence of imprisonment
This- ho' Year.
. would have for the sane
a i they did for transption
/t -e thou4ht was the great practical difficulty.
Introduced been far he,ter had this subj. et been
thoughthro the medium of a Bill. lie wood
bcgate4lll3l4M prerogative of the Crown, but it aouhl
, v been more satista-t ,ry to this cou.itry 11.4 d these.
witho
4Pinaaaniflais COW proposed 'been embodied in a.13'11. As it
as w re now discussing the subject inferenti).
„e .ut having any opp.•rtunttv or power of altering;.
the details of the prop:: ii. There could be no doubt
vice t CaPt3in Maccon.chie had rein term great ser"
the to the country, in his efforts to rendn,.r.
;„e punishment trativortation ilfece. a 1
~,,_ , failure of the existing ,systeni could nut
Zilid at his door. The flee inhabitants of Van Die-
tes"Len tested
Land had, long ago, aro again and again, pro-
the e
larngiintitinisit that island beingmade the
er..
depository of
of this c:•untry, and the consequinice wee,
le administrators4, of the law hal o-xprienced consider
f
trms wieulty in carrying out the prevailing system o
Nrtation. He was hardly aware how' there mild