The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-15 00:00:00

ENGLAND AND PRUSSIA.

Mr. HINDLEY wished to know from the Noble
Lord at the head of the Foreign Department whether
this country had entered into any treaty offensive and
defensive with Prussia ?
Lord PALMERSTON said there was no truth in the
report that such a treaty had been signed between this
country and Prussia; and the only foundation that could
exist for the report, he thought, was the statement that
the Prussian Government had determined to pursue the
same line of policy with respect to France that had beett
determined on in this country,
AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS.

Mr. LABOUCHERE, in answer to the question of an
Hon. Member, stated that it was not the intention of the
Government during the present session to introduce any
measure with respect to agricultural statistics.
PUNISHMENT OF DEATH.

Mr. EWART presented a great number of petitions
from different places, praying for the repeal of the
puaishment of death.
Mr. COBDEN presented several petitions to the same
effect.

Mr. EWART then rose for the purpose of moving for
leave to bring in a Bill for the total abolition of the
punishment of death. Although the mass of informa-
tion which had reached him upon the subject was very
large, he should endeavour to make his statement as brief
as was consistent with the tenor of that information and
the gravity of the subject. It might be asked why he
ventured to do so at the present time. He could assure
the House that he should not have adopted the present
times were it not that he felt an increase in the
conviction which he had felt for years that
capital punishment ought to be abolished, and
that that conviction had been increased in the
minds of the people of this country.—(Hear, hear.) He
felt convinced that there was a ♦ast and increasing
amount of conviction in the public mind of the inexpe•
diency of capital punishment. A short time since he
could scarcely find a single clergyman in favour of the
repeal of the punishment of death; he was happy
to say that there were now a great number of great
learning and blameless life—men whom he respected,
and to whom he was deeply attached, who were now
numbered among those who were the most strenuous
advocates for the repeal of that punishment. Many of
the magistrates of the country were also of the same
opinion, and, lastly, it now appeared solemnly recorded
by the reports of a Committee of the House of Lords
that there were several Judges of the land who were
favourable to the repeal of capital punishment, and who
bad thrown the vast weight of their authority into the
scale of justice and humanity. Again, ho found that
juries were less inclined than ever to find per.
sons guilty of those crimes which involved
the penalty of death.—(Hear.) The juries had
latterly found out the means of absolving their con-
sciences from their oaths by acquitting the prisoners on
the ground of insanity. The Right Hon. Baronet the
Secretary for the Home Department had recently ad-
mitted that fact to a certain extent. Many medical men
of great authority in this country and on the continent,
had now admitted within the category of insanity
that which is called " moral misapprehension," awl this
made it a matter of extreme difficulty for any jury to
find persons guilty of capital offences in cases
where a medical man could be found to speak to
that subject in behalf of the accused, and it was
equally difficult for the learned judges to pass
sentence of death upon such persons. He felt convinced,
therefore, that the time was now fast arriving when the
Government and the Legislature of this country would
feel it to be their duty totally to repeal the punishment
of death.—(Hear.) It had been brought forward as an
argument against the abolition of the punishment, that
the recent examples in Ireland had produced in the public
mind a strong opinion in favour of maintaining the
punishment of death. lie believed that such was not
the case. He would ask the House whether the exe-
cutions which recently took place at Clonmel
were of such a nature as to produce that
effect upon the public mind. The Honourable
Gentleman then proceeded to relate the circum-
stances attending the recent execution at Clonmel,
and asked the House whether such scenes were calcu-
lated to produce any moral effect upon the people. He
had been told, indeed, that the effect of such
executions had been to increase the crime of murder,
and he held in his hand letters from various
parts of Ireland, which strongly confirmed such an
impression. He had been put in possession of a remark-
able instance of the inefficacy of capital punishments,
where a man, whose grandfather and father were executed,
ultimately came to the gallows himself. Now in former
sessions, in bringing forward this question, it had been
his duty to refer to the statistical returns which had
been laid before the House on the subject, but he
had always been met with the statement that statis-
tical returns were not to be relied upon. No doubt they
were not always criterions to go by, for the returns
themselves proved the fact, that in times of scarcity and
distress, crime of all kinds increased. There could,
however, be no question about it, that crimes which
were formally capital had greatly diminished since
they had been taken out of that category. The second
kind of documentary evidence upon which ho relied was
a most important report which was presented to the
House of Lords in the last session of Parliament. It
would probably be in the recollection of the /louse that
Lord Brougham moved for a Committee of Inquiry into
the state of the criminal law, and before that Committee
a large number of witnesses were examined, including
some of the leading Judges of England, Scotland, and
Ireland; one of the subjects embraced by the Committee
was capital punishment, and the report the Committee
Came to contained statements which strongly sup-
parted the motion he was bringing forward.
Mr. Charles Phillips was entirely in favour of the
abolishment of the punishment of death, and Mr.
Commissioner Bullock was of the same opinion. Mr.
Rushton, the Liverpool magistrate, and a man of great
legal experience, said, in reply to a question, that the
j),;,1-Itrient mie,lit be pefnly dicnena.d addin—
the public infliction of the punishment possessed no
salutary effect upon those who beheld it. But he would
refer to higher authorities still, namely, the judges of