The Sun.
London, England, 1841-06-18 00:00:00

'EVENING EDITION

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT..

HOUSE OF LORDS, June 17.
Their Lordships assembled at Five o'Clock.
The Metropolis Improvement Bill passed through

Committee. -
The County Bridges Bill passed through Committee.
The Western Australia Bill was read a third time and

The The House of Industry (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The Insolvent Debtors (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The Militia Pay Bill was read a second time, and
ordered to be committed to-morrow.
The Dublin Wide Streets Bill was read a third time.
and passed.
The Earl of CLARENDON moved the second reading
of the Bank of Issue Bill.
The Earl of DEVON presented petitions from Devon-
shire in favour of the Corn-laws.
Lord CLARE presented petitions to the same effect.
Earl FITZWDLLIAM presented a petition from York-
shire, praying for a repeal of the Corn-laws.
The Duke of RUTLAND presented a petition against
the Poor-law Bill.
PUNISHMENT OF DEATH BILL.
The Marquis of NORMANBY moved the second read-
ing of the Punishment of Death Bill.
The Earl of HADDINGTON said he should movet as
an amendment to the clause relating to rape, that after
the word " death," near the end of the clause, should be
inserted " excepting in cases of rape where more than
one person was concerned."
The Marquis of NORMANBY said that her Ma-
jesty's Government thought the proposition of an Hon.
and Learned Gentleman in the other House, was one

-well worthy of their attention, and one it would be con-
sistent with their duty to support. He (the Marquis of
Normanby) thought that, as far as number was con-
cerned, the offence was the same. He would call the
attention of their Lordships to_ a circumstance -which

happened about two years ago. He had hitherto called
their attention to cases where conviction had taken place,
but he would now call their attention to a case where
conviction had not taken place. So strong was the case
to which he was about to allude, that the neighbouring

Magistrates forwarded a memorial to her Majesty's GO:
wernment respecting it. The trial took place at Glou-
cester, and there were more than one prisoner. The cir-
cumstances were revolting, and there was no noubt as to
the facts of the case. Nevertheless the Jury put this
question to the Judge—whether, if they found them
guilty, the men's lives would be spared ? The result
was, an acquittal. The Jury were to blame, certainly,
but this was the general feeling amongst Jurors, and the
great object of their Lordships was to obtain convictions.
In another case where the party was indicted for an as-
sault and rape, an acquittal took place, the Judge having
informed him (the Marquis of Normanby) that the ex-
theme penalty of the law being attached to the crime pre-
vented a conviction taking place. He would put it to their
Lordships whether, when the convictions had dimi-
nished in proportion to the acquittals to so large an
amount as the returns exhibited, it would not be

most judicious in them to amend the law so as to ensure
conviction in every case where the facts warranted it.
He 'believed that the interests of justice would be best
pr muoted by not attempting to make the distinction pro-
p. Red by his Noble Friend. The practice and experience
f Courts of Law had shown that juries, upon wham
hey must rely for carrying the law into effect, would
not convict where the capital punishment was attathed.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA said it was his Intention
:to propose an amendment by striking out the two last
lines of clause 3, and if the amendment was re-

jected, he should propose that the third clause be struck
out altogether.
After a few words from Lord ABINGER in support
of the amendment,

Lord DENMAN said he was extremely unwilling to
take any part os a question relating the amendment of
the criminal law, unless he distinctly saw that the House of
lords was determined to pass the amendments suggested,
because he felt the utmcst inconvenience, if, as a le-
gislator, he should oppose a law which afterwards, as
a judge, he might bt hound to carry into effect. He
had, therefore, abstal-i d from taking part in the
discussion which took place on the measure the
other night, and. had also abstained from coming
down to the House because he found the House of

Commons had sent up a Bill to abolish the punishment
of death in cases of that sort, and he waited for the
decision of their Lordships, and to bow to the law
as it should be pronounced by the Legislaturo. But he
must say he thought when the House of Commons
had sanctioned a principle as to the offence in
general, and when their Lordships also had sanc-
tioned a principle as to the offence in general, it
was a monstrous anomaly that capital punishments
:should be kept alive with regard to any particular mode
si the offence that might be brought before a Judge.—
(Hear, hear.) It was clear that the offence as committed
`by many persons might partake of a character of
cruelty and profligacy which might not be the case
;with regard to offences committed by individuals. But
rapes committed by individuals might be of a far worse
character than those committed by several persons.—
(Hear, hear.) Ile (Lord Denman) had had experience
on this subject, and he knew by experience these rapes
were seldom deliberately committed. They were usually
the result of some accidental communication at a
fa.ir of junketing, where persons of different sexes
came together, and when at a late hour -of the night
:some unfortunate female whose imprudence had led her
into the company, became the victim of brutal and dis-
•gusting outrage. But lie was sure that there were
eases of this sort where their Lordships' feelings
and the feelings of the public would revolt at, the inflic-
tion. of the punishment of death.—(Hear, hear.) Then
why should one class of cases be selected in order to raise
inq .tries respecting it, and to raise the most painful duties
the ,t could possibly be cast upon a Jury ? His Noble
lend had said for the sake of experiment ; but was
tt.ere no danger—nothing revolting in such expe
r anents ? Was it fit still to ai.k Juries, as an
alternative, whether they would commit perjury
or that which they considered murder ? He believed
the principles were much too strongly urged.—(Hear,
hear.) His own opinion was that the Juries manfully
did their duty, and that it was as often the fault of the
Judge, who contemplated with horror the depriving
a fellow creature of life, as of juries, that persons ac-
cused of this crime were frequently acquitted. But did they
warrant experiments of the case stated by the Noble Mar-
quis? In a case which had been tried at GloucesterbeforeMr
Baron Bolland, three men were tried for the offence of

rape, :and the jury returned a verdict of acquittal upon
the hr at indictment, but the Learned Counsel put in the
plea of autrefois acquit, and upon that objection they
were released. There was no doubt that the ac-
quitted in that case was an improper one. Still he
tt, eugla t that such questions ought not to be put
repeate ily to Jurors.—(Hear, hear.) No doubt a
cc/mkt 'dolls objection had in some cases defeated jus-
tice. H e confessed that it appeared to him that it would
be injuri jus to make this single exception. It was one
to which ,the Ministers of the law would feel the greatest
objecticla. He 'ha Ino wish to press their opinions against
the decizion of tfteir Lordships ; but as he had found that
the opini‘ ms ene representations of the Judges had had
great wei ;ht .'w th their Lordships, ho would take the li-
berty of s ugge, ,tine that before this clause was passed,
himself at el iis Noble Friend (Lord Abinger) should
have an •a-, a Aprtunity of conferring with the Judges,
and ascent lining their opinion. He would have re-
frained frc au making those observations, had he not
felt that th a general principle being once carried, no small
and aceide atal circumstance should be suffered to inter-
fere with it.
The E srl of WICKLOW opposed the amendment, on 1
ti,,,ground that there were grades of criminality in the I
off rice ; fiat in some some forms it was aggravated,
and in oteers of less importance. If they drew a dis-
eduetior.: at all, they must draw it in such a number of
canes t bat it would bean absurdity to abolish this punish-
mat at all.
rd ABINGER complained that the Bill had not
eardta,-;-one sufficient consideration by their Lordships.
The Earl of HADDINGTON suggested that the
clau.se should be postponed.
After a few observations from the Marquis of WEST-
3LEATH,
The Marquis of NORMANBY said that if there was
any strong feeling in the House, that the question re-
quir
ed further reference, he should not oppose it, though
at. the same time he was prepared to give a negative to the
postponement of the question ; and also to urge upon their
_Lordships to do so. His own inclinationl wast toliat a goon
but still if it was the opinion of the
ment should take place he should House
notou object to it. post-
pone
TI to Earl of WICKLOW complained that they were
leeis feting in the dark on the entire measure. They had
taker i no opinion whatever on the subject, nor made
a ay inquiry respecting
this question, which was one of
se ch great importance. ,Their Lordships wereva
now
cr Bed on the last day, of the session to make a violent al-
tk ration inthe law, and it was urged, on the other side,
tthadt
the measiare had come up from the House of Commons. Iha
certainly come up from' the Commons, but under what
ciretniistances ? When there was such an accumulation
of business before them that they could not give that due
consideration to the sabject which it required. If their
Lord: hips passed this law they would lower themselves
in the opinion of the country. He trusted that such
a viokrit alteration in the law would be rejected by
their 'Lordships.
I :aord BROUGHAM said, that among the reasons
ivAen for postponing the measure was the great difficulty
in -framing a provision of this description. He had on
al former occasion, when the subject was before the
House, stated those difficulties.—(Cries of Hear, hear.)
Ie thought that the subject, from the difficulties which
surrounded it, required further consideration, and that
their Lordships should pause before they proceeded to
introduce a change in the present law. He was
not aware that it would be impossible to revert to
the capital punishment in aggravated cases, if it should
be found free from the objections to which he had
alluded, and if the difficulties could be overcome. He
could not agree with the doctrine that if they remitted a
severe punishment in any case they had not a right, after
haying had greater experience, and after having further
considered the subject, to retrace their steps and resort
io the severe punishment again, if it should be found
necessary; and he should think that in making altera-
tions in the criminal law he should incur a great risk if
those alterations were to be considered as final, conclu-
sive, and binding, and could not be altered after further
experience. He thought enough had been said to show
that it would be better to postpone the further conside-
•fation of this enactment
" The Martinis of NORMANBY4ad no objection to
adjourn
.the debate until to-morrow. It would be ex-
tremely inconvenient to postpone ite beyond to-morrow,
because
must be, yet e. ther were
urn ed tA:1;le
eiany amendments made, the Bill
The Earl of WlCKaAn'irmocnoUsid see no reason for
:postponing the Whole :tali
-the clause at once, and :tali should .They could divide uponeedd hot be rejected theft
the considerations of the Proposition before their Lord-
h