The Sun.
London, England, 1833-02-27 00:00:00

code ought to proceed at a sure and steady pace, until
every man in the country could say, with a safe conscience,
the infliction of death only remains in cases where it wa,
impossible to make a slighter punishment effectual to the
great end of deterring criminals.
Mr. WYNN agreed that nothing but the strongest cir-
cumstances ought to induce Government to lessen the
punishment of transportation for life when once the sen-
tence had been passed.
Mr. BUCKINGHAM said that the philosophy of
the criminal code was first to prevent crime, and next to
effect restitution to the parties injured, but without a tinc-
ture of vengeance. Death was an irreparable punishment,
and, in his opinion, it ought never to be inflicted. He
had been desired by his constituents to support petitions of
this description, and he did so with pleasure.
Mr. FERGUSSON agreed that the criminal code of
England was capable of still greater mitigations, but he did
not think it would he expedient to abolish the punishment
of death entirely. In his opinion the crime of burglary
required a mere distinct definition, and some general in-
quiry into the whole subject ought to he instituted. The
criminal code of England was at present more severe than
that of any country of Europe, for the statute book had
hung back in the march of civilization.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL explained.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL only rose to add his
opinion, that there still remained cases in which the seve-
rity of the law might be relaxed, besides those in which it
had already been mitigated.
A MzaiaEK, who said that lie was one of the visiting
Magistrates of the prisons of Middlesex, earnestly recom-
mended that more effectual measures should be adopted to
to carry into effect the resolutions of the Committee on
prison discipline. He especially remonstrated against the
present disgraceful state of the gaol of Newgate. in which

1,200 prisoners were now confined, and classification ren-
dered almost impossible by the smallness of the building.
Mr. EWART applauded the conduct of Government in
sending a proper person to the United States, to make
inquiries into prison discipline in the great towns of Phi-
ladelphia and New York. He also strongly censured the
barbarous code of the game laws, which tended to increase
rather than diminish crime.
The petition was then laid on the table.
Mr. HUME gave notice that, on the 11th of March,
he should call the attention of the House to the report of
a Committee recently reprinted, on the subject of erecting
a new building for the use of the House of Commons, and
the expense which it might be necessary to incur for that
purpose.
Mr. RICE presented a petition from the town of Cam-
bridge, praying for a repeal of the house and window tax.
Mr. PRYAIE supported its prayer, and the petition was
laid on the table.

Mr. PHILLPOTTS presented a petition from Glouces-
ter, praying for a repeal of the drawback allowed upon
the exportation of soap.
Mr. WALTER rose to present a petition from Work-
ingham, in Berkshire, complaining that in many parishes
there were levied large amounts for impropriate tithes,
while the vicar or other resident clergyman was left to
subsist upon an antiquated stipend of 30/. or 401. a year ;
the petitioners, therefore, prayed that means might be
adopted by Parliament to make adequate provision for the
clergy in all cases where there were large impropriate
tithes. The petitioners begged to assure the house, that
nothing could ha further from the wishes of the petitioners
than to recommend any alteration tending to despoil the
Church of its just rights, or interfere with property in
any manner. . _ .

Mr. PHILLPOTS presented a petition from the county
of Pembroke, praying for the abolition of slivery; and
the same Hon. Member presented several petitions from
other places to the same effect.
Mr. SHANE presented a petition from Eye (Suffolk),
praying for a repeal of the tax on malt and hops.
The same Hor.r. 111 EMBER presented a petition from one
of the hundreds of the county of Suffolk, complaining
that many carts used for agricultural purposes were, at
the discretion of the surveyors, charged as taxed carts.
Mr. RICE said that it certainly was not intended to
extend to agricultural carts, and that he had no reason to
think that any such were improperly charged ; if they
were, he was sure that means would be taken to prevent
its recurrence.

Colonel TORRENS presented a petition from Bolton,
in favour of the Ten Hours' Limitation Factory Bill, and
also praying that no children under the age of nine years
be employed in factories. He observed that many persons
were apprehensive that limiting the hours of labour could
not but have the effect of increasing the expenses of pro-
duction ; but he would offer to such persons, as the best
consolation, the assurance, that the repeal of the taxes on
bread would more than compensate them for any increased
expenses of production.
Colonel WILLIAMS warmly supported the prayer of
the petition.
Mr. FRYER said that the whole cruelty to children
arose out of the tax on bread, and not the cruelty of the
masters. Of this the House might he satisfied, that if not
within those walls, at least outside of them, means would
be taken to put an end to that most odious tax.
Mr. C. FERGUSSON was of opinio❑ that the lan-
guage of the Hon. Member for Wolverhampton was per-
fectly unwarrantable ; and that the proper mode of dealing
with the question of the corn laws was not by uttering
such threats as the House had then heard. The cor❑
laws would, he trusted, be well and wisely considered in
all their bearings. As to Mr. Sadler's Bill, to which the
petitioners referred, it was fraught with wisdom and hu-
manity.
Mr. HUME said that be considered the question before
the House as one of principle, and that he wished Hon.
Members would treat it as such. The taunt that bad
been thrown cut against the Hon. Member for Wolver-
hampton, was not deserved, for he felt sure that the Hon.
Gentleman dealt fairly with the subject before the House.
For himself, he ret.eatedly heard the masters of factories
accused of wanton cruelty. They were called brute•, as
if they took pleasure in inflicting punishment. He heard
this accusation of cruelty with regret, and did not think
they deserved it. They were also charged with avarice,
and that was by some assigned as a cause for their severity.
Now, he would ask one question—were the ordinary pro-
fits of capital increased by the exercise of severity? If
not, avarice could not be the cause of severity. He did
not think that home competition obliged master-manufac-
turers to have recourse to harsh treatment ; in his opinion,
the chief cause lay with the landholders, and with that
House, which legislated for them. To prove this, he
would ju-t state that a cotton-spinner in France paid only
335. per quarter for his wheat, whilst the cotton-spinner
in England paid 555. The consequence was, that the
English cotton-spinner, to make up for the difference of
229., was obliged to exact twelve or fourteen hours' labour
from children, instead of ten hours or less, which would
be only required if the price of corn was lower. This
was the plain cause of the distress of master-manufactu-
rers, as it was of their exacting so much labour from those
they employed. Let this corn monopoly be reduced, and
not only the distress of the manufacturers would be alle-
viated, but also the bald treatment which factory children
undergo would be done away with. The consequence of
doing away with the corn monopoly would not be to re-
duce the price of corn in this country, but rather to raise
its price in other countries, and thus put the English ma-
nufacturer on a footing with the foreigner, and enable hint
to compete with him on equal terms. If Hon. Members
had not their judgments clouded by a fear of seeing the
price of corn lowered, they would have seen to what cause
the harsh usage of factory children ought to be attributed.
He entirely agreed with the Hon. Members for Bolton and
Wolverhampton, that if food was made cheap, the distress
of manufacturers would be decreased, and the complaints
against the severity they exercise over the children they
employ, would be no longer made.
Mr. CUTLAR FERGUSSON begged to state in expla-
nation that in the remarks he had made he bad not the
slightest intention to throw any odium on the masters of
factories.