The Sun.
London, England, 1840-07-30 00:00:00

EVENING ED'TION

insesnee had there been an increase.—(Cries of
" Hear, hear.") It had been fouad that all
the predictions which had been indulged in as to the
increase of crime which was to follow the relaxation of
the severity of the Crimine code bad been completely
falsified, and he was convinced 53sat the predice.one re-
spectirig the future effects of the Bill would also be
falsified. On a former occasion, when the pressnt Chief
Jest:ice of the Court of Queen's Bench bad proposed to
abolish the punishment of death in cases of forgery, it
was said be many that such a step woad shake the
stability of commerce, and would lead to the ruin of the
fortunes of individnals. The Chief Justioe of the
Clum.'s Bench, however, succeeded in his virtuous en-
deavours, and the apprehensions on the sul'j :el turned
out to be groundless. The offence of forgery had since
that thite greatly diminished, aed they no longer heard
of the ruin of the commerce elf the country. He
would ere real the House to consider the questiya i 3
its true light. Let them do that be law, and
according to law, which was now done against the' law
and in spite of the law. He only asked them to exettlt
from capital punishment all these offences which were,
not at present punished, while the law continued sae-
peeded over the heads, not only of criminals, but of
Judges And Juries, so as prect:caliy to defeat the law.•
He was astonished to hear the Noble Lord my that be
was not aware that Juries would not convict in capital
cases because that death wooid follow. He would be
sorry to overstate an argument, ler .less a fact, even to
carry out the objects he had in view, but he believed
that it was impossible for any one to eiverstate the pry''
dig'ous mischief which existed from the' utter impossi-
bility of inducing Juries to convict in capital cases,
where death would follow, and in which the 7, in conime%
with many of their fellow countrymen, thought death ought
not to follow. Only that day he had received ne
letter from Mr. Leathern, of Leeds, who sa id he ha°
met the treasurer of the West Riding coming from the
assizes at York, who said that the crimes trial there
were of a deep and heinous character, but th ta Juries
refused to convict because the loss of life would follow ;
and he further was informed of a barrister who vs ent to
York, convinced that it would be unsafe to arneleorate
the law of punishment any further, but what he saw
take place at York had quite converted him to his (Mr.
K.'s) opinion upon the subject. Why, even in cases of
murder the convictions were very uncertain. It had been'
said that he proposed to legislate under a false feeling or
humanity, and that he proposed tee withdraw the protec-
tion of the law from rerson and property. His intenticm
was, and he beliered his Bill would give, protection awl
farther security to both, otherwise he would not press
his Bill upon Parliament. In the case of rape, out or
100 indictments they had only obtained 12 convict tinge,
because death might have followed ; wleile in indictments
for the minor offence they had obtained 6t) per cent. That
was a proof that the present law gave no cceurity to person-
He conceived that the time had now seome when tbe
Parliament was imperatively called upon' to go further
in those ameliorations—to complete the e 'eerie so nobli
begun by the Noble Lord and his predecessors. 146
trusted the principle of the Bill would me, st with the
approbation of the House, and that it woul di soon be-
come the law of the land, awl tend, as he sully be
lieved it would, to promote the diminution of ci iene•
Sir R. PEEL, for one, would not impute en b's
Hon. Friend that he was actuated by any false it:cc:ink:ls
of humanity—he believed that he was acting from pure;
and disinterested motives, and in the conscientious. belt
that, by removing the punishment of death in ;certain
cases, he was promoting additional protection to person
and property.—(Hear, hear.) But, after the most
mature consideration he (Sir Robert Peel) could}
give the subject, the Honourable Gentleman'
had failed to impress upon his mind tb6.
impression which had been made upon his own,. and lin
was not prepared to consent to the remission of the Pr'
nishment of death in ;satiny of the aggravated ci tses CO
templated by the Bill ; he thought they would n of Orr"
the public mind along with them if they went so fa;
Why, he would ask, should his .-lon. Friend retain tb?
punishment of death in the cases or murder and tr easnac
In those cases there were grave doubts on many 1414.:
but his Hon. Friend was afraid that he would net I'
such cases carry the public mind along with him. Sup'
pG,5e a case of burglary, accompanied by severe 4401 tr
the pardon, or a rape committed upon the body of ac Pis
person by a rich and powerful individual, and yet en.ta
offences should not be capital offences, the Pubial
mind would shudder at the legislation of the 1.401.1.5,7;
His Hon. Friend hasi referred to extrem a cases whi-es
might be brought forward, in which witness es and jet.,
tae
had forgotten the obligations of their oaths% ; but %le
had had experience enough to show that where bbd
crime was aggravated and the evidence clear, itwors "to
generally done their duty.—(Hear, hear.) Tie veielF,
take the case of setting fire to her Majesty's do cleslloo,
should they part with the security ehey.now had r, 'iii,..
pose a party actuated by feelings of' national aninlntbet
setting fire to vessels of war, would ttee knowledge('sa
his life was forfeited, or the certainty that his life so,,
not be taken, tend most to the security tit' that rt. tee
Before he consented to so extensive a reoissios not
punishment of death, as to exempt cases in evlld, '1,1,, be
only the whole of the vessels in a dock-yard. entg,'i elt
destroyed, and the crews murdered, he shouldl°-
f the
much more narrowly into the probable efficace° its,
....e5e.a....,,..a,.....e. .1--f „es ue suueeeeseed. enes..
would, under these circumstances, sugvest tilt! -ntil
ponement of the measure for six or eight reenot"sl -Be
the question had been more maturely considered'` or.
understood from his Noble Friend that tranaPally.
tation to . New South Wales was to be grad° of
abolished ; but he presumed that transportation to sane .
the suborciinate settlements of the colony, wnnl o'6-
instituted, but when there was some doubt in the Pia
lie mind as to the punishment of transport ation b,eke •
continued, he feared the step they were about to
one.
in passing the present measure, would be a lootY 'e 01
an injudicious one. -He bad no objection to llele.
the alterations contemplated by the Bill, but as 11 Iv A es
it was of too sweeping and extensive a character, eTter.
the Noble Lord moved its rejeetion, he bad no a
native but to vote for the motion. f 111
Mr. EWART said that the last arguenent o ,
Right Hon. Baronet was founded on the inaelega3ciend
imprison.nent, and of transportation as seco ndarY Pore
but the defects in these systems of Pl
ishments ; im"
'tient should not be allowed to stand in the e ray °Lord
provements in the criminal code. The N obit t the
had relied a good deal upon the fear of death, athat
Right Hon. Baronet had completely discard" tba
principle.—(
Cries of' " No, no.") Ille left it Ivo,
House to reconcile the arguments of those win or(
Members, which completely contradictod each a the
The Right Honourable Baronet had re ferre'‘,";° ,sty's
case of a person setting fire to he.r :••••nit!!,- the
dock-yard, 'out the case had beets pwt bid he
Hon. and Learned Member for loswich,• b.- oulli
had clearly shown that if death ensued, the pa rty
ep)
be liable to an indictment for murder._( He. If' b. till
The Noble Lord had adverted to the false s:,rnelie'snes
that existed in favour of criminals, but since the• alive
merit of the criminal code that false sympathy had sited
considerably decreased, and it had never been elge_cui
in favour of the crime but on account of the en orr",.nt,
disproportion between the offence and the punislinring
They had an instance the other day of the people v°
part part with the law against the criminal, and ref ei ro,
him with execrations and detestation. kiavini; Ptber
seeded so far, he thought they might safely talSee milori-
step, and effect a still further improvement erri
urinal code of the country. t bird
Mr. LANGDALE said, in voting for the 4ter,
reading, he should do so with the intention o E n'
wards dividing the House to except cases of ref o'' a the
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, a°
House divided, when there appearea—
For the third reading ' ~.. bl
Against it . . 7$
Majority ....271
The Bill is consequently lost. fi°ll6°
Mr. KELLY then said, after the decision t.heisel be
had come to, he should withdraw the siinilar• '
had introduced for Ireland. 131 i .1.0
CLERGY RESERVES (CANADA) ~, aliog
Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the 00 '"--
. of
of this Bill. .
üßludinildt,aukeoenptelrioe
staMtinrg. iihisUoMbjEectsioanids toh ,
which was, that it gaveethwaeon
funds towards the support of an Established Chore. rbe
Canada contrary to the wishes of the peoPle': h he
Noble Lord knew that the Bill, a copy of wluci 01
held in his hand, had been carried by a majority o:aeete
one, and as was stated by the Governer-.General ton 003
last day of the Session, and after many members ei),.P:seo
to it had left town. From the year 18'26 to the ? ',wall
proportion Pr
ttPih:kerot °Coll ;lie i°O4 of
time, the House of Assembly had determined r eP'"„oseM
against the application of these funds to religious p Ir,rtbei r
Of this there could be no stronger proof than e 0
Os,
resolution, which had been laid on the table o ' i
9.
House. This Bill took these funds out of the pow' tee
the Colonial Legislature, and diverted them fro° •et
purposes of educatiorefor which they had fourteen tr .e, I,
since the year 1826 determined they should be aPPLI 01
Therefore he objected to it. It had been carried lee.
trick, and he asked the Noble Lord (J. Russell)vie its
ther he could consistently with his own deelarnt'%ele
his letter to the Governor General, that he wished 5-.0
measures to be carried out as would be consistent With
the wishes of the people, persevere in this rne.l use
No man could have heard the sentiments of the ;Patio
of Assembly without being convinced of their elleattoe,
to it, and why then run counter to the general Jee. this
and involve the Government in a dispute °,l eel
kind ?—(Hear, hear.) He was sure prudence °ITO'
dictate to them, not to add to the discontent nee
already existed. By urging this Bill the 11°, to
on
Lord was violating principles he of all men ole1Pop•
respect, namely, the rights of' conscience, and the fie
position to a Church supported by the State-
Cosa
therefore begged to move, That this House feele __Or
fident that to promote the prosperity of that portl to
her Majesty's dominions in Upper Canada, 3n: see
satisfy the earnest desire of the people of that provitreo ,
it is expedient t, give the most favourable consideoyo
jt
to the wishes of her I\l...Hey's loyal subjects ti!cro :.:',„
to terniina!o 0:P ipa!oivi,: and disseesion wheel i 4.? c,,,,
hitherto existed on the subject of the Clergy Reser%._.',,
to remove a barrier to the settlement of the cotp_ulof
and to provide a fund available for the promoting