The Sun.
London, England, 1858-02-10 00:00:00

C--'

[PRICA 4D. STAMPED 513 .1:

menacing expressions, and he should have liked to have
seen them withdrawn as for formally as they were used.
He could not but honour those who were exquisitely
sensitive upon this sutjeet, because the asylum which
we offered to the victime of misery and persecution had
always been a sore point with despotic countries, and he
was anxious that we should not in the slightest degree
diminish the freedom of the reception which we offered
to such persons. He was no enemy to the Government
of the noble viscount, but be implored him to consider
the position in which he was piecing himself. Ile did
not knew what course would be adopted by hon, and
right hon. gentlemen either on that or the other tide of
the betties, but he hoped the result of the debate would
show that they etill retained those independene feelings
and that love of England which had led theirc metituents
to place them in that distinguished a.ssetub!y. Ile elm
hoped that the noble, 1 trd would take wise eouesel vri•lo
himself, and would not obstinately adhere to the precipi-
tate determination which had led him to propose this
premature legislation—a legi-lation which, if atrented to,
would be but a dead letter, and would afford no '-once-
dent for future times. Ile would no' rep-et the
painful,
the disgusting expreseions which hal ail edire, the
Monitear, but ho could not abstain front rewinding the
house of the words of Elmer I 111., who once said to his
Parliament, "I have rec,ired a blow in the face, and all
Europe is looking on to see how I beer i'," and then
declared war. He did not say that any such case ha
arisen here—God forbid ; but the appearance of such
documents in the Moniteur was enough to a,renve the
self-love and alarm the patriotism of every person in the
country, especially when he found them awed npin so
suddenly by the Government of her Majesty. He most
earnestly supplicated the noble viscount opposite not to
let any fal'e pride prevent him yielding to the manly
sense of duty which actuated him upon all occasion'.
Let him not unneceoserily peril the popularity which he
hedehi'herto enjoyed ; but let him, by showing an en
lightened deference to the publicly expressed desire of
the country through itstfree press and its free represen-
tatives, rattan that place in the estimatioa of the people
which he was in danger of losing by his present most
unwise attempt at legislation. (Carers.)
Sir Cr'. GREY.—I hope in the few observations which
I thn.l deem it my duty ta address to the house upon
tile qee.stegiAeos t-d fr it censiderstion I Aid!
not depart 'ruin that calm and temp::rato tee* whiefi--f
am happy to arty has characterised toe discussion of this
bill hitherto, and which caunot fail to give weight and
authority to whatever decision the hcuee may be pleased
to come to. (Sven,) Th.fere- I advert to some of the
obj-ctions which have been made •to the motion of my,
noble friend at the head of the Goeerumente I may be
allowed to express the satisfaction which I feel that,
while there has been in Parliament and throughout the
country the utmost abhorrence of the crime %filch has
lately been attempted against the 1 fe of the Emperor of
the French, there has been at the same time a sentiment
expressed in entire unison with that which is sincerely
professed to be entertained and acted upon by her Ma-
jesty'e Government, net to infringe in the elightest
degree that secret. right of asylum %%Lich it is the proud
boast of this country to offer to every puli Mel refugee,
of wl atever shade of politicel opkiee, fl.ofi,g freer per-
secution in the land of his teirth and residence. (Cher re )
Tne hor, and learned geutfenan has alluded to come
expressions in tba despatch of Count Walewski which
he understands as implying a desire to interfere with
right of asylum, and to compel Parliameut to Fase a law
for sending refugees out of this country without public
trial, without conviction of any ofEnce, on in, re: sus-
picion, or on grounds of whoa may ba termed moral
conviction. If those exerertions bore the meaning
attributed to them by the hon. and learned gentleman,
I can only say that her :ILjesty's Government has not
for one mome t enter:reined any such propo,:ition, or
given the slightest e in any qua• ter that such
demand wet"' be comp:ied (Ceerr..) I may
al,o be, allowed to expree,td, if I may do se without
irregularity, the sincere satisfaction with which I have
perceived that the distinguished leader in another place
of the party whom I see opposite has expressed in his
own eloquent la ,guage, weich few can., rive', senti-
ments in entire accordance with the opiciona pro-
fessed by 1-er Majesty's Government. (Hear.) The
obj,ctians which here been urged to the proposition
before the house, as has been well stated by tine hen. and
learned member for Sheffield, resolve them eves ir.to two
classes, the one directed against the enaetimeuts of the
bill itself, and the other and main class against the time
when this proposition is made. With reepeet to the hill
it.elf, let me recall the attention of the hseese to the
CirellragalteeS under which her Majesty .c Government
have felt it their duty to introduce it. A crime has been
attempted in France which, although the jedicial process
may not be yet complete, is a matter of general notoriety,
and which no one can d ellot has been attempted to be i
committed, whatever doubts may be entertained—and
doubt tnu-t be entertained till after tai 1 acid conviction
—with respect to the individuals implicated in it. I
regret to say it is equaly certain that that though
perpetrated on the soil of France, where its intended
victim was sure to he found, has been the result of de-
signs formed in this country, of measures taken in this
cluntry, of plan-concocted hire by those who are er.jeying
that right of :my !um which we ere heepy,and proud to
afford them so long as they conform to our laws and
conductthems:leeein obediee c • to the rules which govern
all persons residing in her Majesty's dorniniqns. Under
these circumstances our attention was naturally and
necessarily called, irrespective of any communica,ron
from the French Government, to the state of the law
which was appl:csble to conspiracies of this nature. The
Lion. And learned gentleman who epeke last has referred
to a question which was addressed to me in 1851 by my
right hon. friend the member f r Bute, with respect to
enirtain ellegeti ens then made r garding the designs and
conspiracies of foreign refugees residing in this country,
and tie the answer which I gave t) tlet question. That
case was wholly different and distinct from the present.
It related to revolutionary deigns c n:coa eel here with
a view to subvert the existing Gov, rum tits in foreign
countries, and to establish forms of government ioore
in acc Hance with the opinions of those who
proposed to curry the plots iota execution ; and the
answer which I3gave had no reference whatever to at-
tempts at the assassination of in tividinehe (Cheers,) I
then stated what I now repeat, that I believe our laws
are amply sufficient to prevent foreigners residing in this
country from taking means in this country from levying,
war on other natione, inasmuch as, 111 addition to the
common law, there are statutes exiting ley which spe-
cific penaltie s against those who shall adopt measures
here for levying war against any Power in amity with
our Sovereign. But what is the case now I There is an
attempt, not to subvert a Government, but to destroy
the life of an individeal—an attempt which, although
providentially not eitecessful —against the person chiefly
aimed at, yet unhappily was successful against many
innocent people whose lives were sacrificed by those who
seem to be utterly regardless of human suffering pro-
vided they gratify their vindictive feelings against ally
one whom they may choose to regard as their enemy.
(Hear, hear.) Will any hon. gentleman deny that this
is a crime of the greatest airocity? (Loud cheers )
The house ought to recollect, moreover, that we
are not seeking to deal with the men who
actually perpetrate such crimes, but with the men who
in comparative safety plot them in this country—with
men who do not risk their own lives in attempting to
carry their dosigne into execution, but who instizate and
hire assassins to do that which they are too cowardly to
undertake themselves---(cheers)—that is the class of
per. one against whom we think that additional precau-
tier' ought to be taken, in order to deter them from
commit irg crimes which I believe every living English-
man abhors and condemns from the bottom of his heart.
(Cheers.) Oa booking into the law upon till,: subject.,
what did we find 4 Hera let me make ono observation
with reference to remarks that have been made in the
course of thi, debate as if this question had been settled
by a declaration—entitled, I admit, toi. the utmost
respect—uttered elsewhere by the Laid Chief Joe-
tice, to the effect, as has been assumed, that the
law in its present state is amply suf'lttient to meet
all cases of this kind. (Hear, hear.) Let me first
protest against the doctrine—entit fey new in this house
—that aey la vyer, however eminent, any Jo !gee, how-
b,
ever high his position or great his learning, is to e
taken as an unimpeachable authority as to the sufficiency,
of any law to meet the objects whioh it is intended t
serve. The judges are the proper persons to determine
judicially, after argument, what is the lan of the land,
how it can be enforced, and what the penalty
which is
attachable to any crime ; but I demur altolgettal'itae,,rtt;optahre
uuconstitutionsl doctrine that they are tuoti ezney
0,
any
liarnent an opinion with regard to the ec-eiti:on I
purpose.
law for the accomplishrneut
:has toot
tathe sees° in which
(Cheers.)
the Lord Chief Justice madesure hisbonbservations elsewhere,
has been attached to
but such is the meaning wino
them in this house, and therefore I feel bound to pretest
against it. It is competent to the judges to determine
whether& conspiracy to murder in this country isor is not
a misdemeanor, and no one will deny that conspiracy to
murder a person in this country is a miederneanour
b ale according to common 1 eve. Tee pedgos
aro also competent to decide the question whether a
conspiracy
by Eut,j,cti of her Majesty to tomeepuntre to
commit in a foreign country what according to the law
of England would be murder, is a inisdenieenour, and
up
on that point likewise no doubt can be entertained by
any one acquainted with nur criminal cede. Advancing
a step further, the judges are competent to determine
whether a conspiracy by aliens in this c )untry to murder
another alien iu a foreign country is a iniedemeancur
cppisxbie by cur c;?urt,,, ate indictable offence at common
tee., subjecting the parties concerted to the same penal-
ties as if it had been a conspiracy by subjects of her
Majesty to murder another of her Majesty's subjects
either in this or in a foreign country. Upon that question
I understand, from the ordinary sources of inf.ormation, a
decided opinion has been expressed elsewhere by the
distinguished judge to whom I have already referred, and
to that opinion of course I bow with the most reepuctfel
deference, although I beiieve I am right in saying that
I 'l' r si n tf the eenrre bee ever gone that length, and
that there are meet, .nd 7-etet lice re who,
before the opinion in question W 11,3 proneuLima , ten tet-
tainted great doubts whether a conspiracy by aliens in
this country to murder another alien in a foreign coun-
try, which is the case tl.:".t. has ae*naily cecerred, was
the
an c•ffzace puuishalAc by our IF, therefore,

_
3/

~. , it ,
• '\,`,• PVT's:
judges have pronounced what thalami ir, thajli
termed their functions ; and then the fund...t aks:.., arsal a li
'rent have been discharged, andovbatever opiniotsit lii.,:olip: './...e.:-4
bait bets pronounced -by lawyerk, howevire:emii,i'' c:-''' ele
eirii
Perliement it the authority to.deterroig la":.4* ! - ',ie.
petalties attaching to any. o.ffenca be, in its9OrPialr. eit4-'! .t)-fi:-. ''
rnicisatoot:nnfastuntfhlyrseogulti nt
its ea! ma 10411i*IFea},, ~ . 4_4 di-__T --:' --, ~.'"""'"). !::)!'
4.,
dnequfneoutt:te ;:peftfertasttohneoss:fduroenn't I: deter
theainp jOhflic7i7iti:76b::4lli:titineettriil :':-.
laws always aim at fixing ler an offence a cera n miner at ..'
1
of punidonent, which may a ff,rd a reaeonab'e probabirty. '
that it will deter parsons horn its corntaiseion. The hon. '
mbeovesduhetchpetiabmieenodfniienitt!
ad
and learned gentleman
mightwho
mitted that our laws
provemW, and that it might be right to inquire with
the view of making it sufficient to deter from Use nom-
mission of the crime from which eersone are not now
deter red owing to the lightness and inadequacy of pnoieh. '
ment on conviction. We then find, assuming for
st .
moment that there is no uncertainty as to thenature
of the clime, that it is a misdemeanour for a foreii ner
in this country to couspre, or to incite persoee to per.
perpetrate, the murder of a person in another country.
The law only made that a misdemeanour, and the
utmost punishment to which a person on conviction
was liable for so atrocious a crime (he hirasell remaining
in the country while the crime was being executed, and
not subjecting himself to any of the ri'k attending the
attempt) is aid atteahing to the offence of a made-
!
ini anour. The boa. and Ira- ned gentlealan wholantepoke -
assumed that the puoishtuent attachinT to a misde-
meanour is of an indefinite amount. Now, for such
an offence the court might impose imprisonment,
the ordinary nta.:eimunt of which is the period of two
years. But the hon. and learned member for Mulhoret
observed that the Court might impose a fine of 2,0001:
(11r. Warren—" In that particular case it did.") No
d• übt the court might also impose a fine, which would
amount to perpetual imprisonment, but my hon. and
learned friend must know that whatever might be the
discretion left to the court, it would never be exercised
to that extent. It is not a course which our courts
usually adopt to impose, in addition to imprisonment, a
fine utterly beyond the ability of the prisoner to ray.
and thereby to convert the sentence of deteution into
perpetual imprisonment ; but I am sure the !nmoral le
and 1 ',treed member did not mean to suggest that
they would act in so disgraceful a manner in order
to render in certain cases the punishment attached
to misdemeanour stifficiei t, By the state of the law
in England the crime to which the proposed bill re.
fcrred was only a misdemeanour, and I believe that
the reason for ete--h a state of the law ie this, that con-
spiraey to co ..,..t; .c. steurda-,—some persons inciting
others to the cominiesien of the crime, lont.tio far keeping
thernelves cafe as to withdraw themselves from the es-
trem• penalty of the crime—is so abhorrent*" thetas&
kg! (..fitegliehrenen that I do not think any Law
,haabef•Ft
required to be put in force with respect to ft inethiei
ometry. (Bear.) But in Ireland Krum_ As pteu'isrly
q-lheroey somo of society there, and frotii the frepiency
of apr dorm ou.rege:, 'Lie crime wig 7hrlpptir of no I ....•
occurrence. And what did tho Parliement ue I Tile
hon. gentleman has alluded to the two Irish acts on the
subject, but the law ae already .xeting is not an Irish
Act, hut a modern act, passed by the united Parliaments
of Great Britain and Ireland. Toe act sieges the fact
that such crimes were not u efreqnent, and th it, it -watt
necevary nit to lease Vic in to be pun shed by the C 'ill•
paratively light penalty a•tachino-to miedemeanotir; and
for the security of society in that part of the united
kir gr:om (Ireland) the law (1 eth Geore e IV.) renders the
crime a capital felony. We found that in England
ills cff,nce was only a misdemeanour, and we have
thought it right, while mitigating the severity of the
Irish law, to increase the severity of the law in
Etieland, and to make the offence pubs-}able, not by
death, but by penal servitude, the duration of which
should be left to the discretion of the court according to
the Lots Mid c!rcumstaecze of t!-,c. case. I cannot think
that the mere proposal of a comparatively unimportant
bi I cf this kind should be obj tetwoable to the house, and
the lion, and learned gentleman seemed impressed with a
conviction of the inadequacy of the toinieletattnt by the
pre 'tent la v when be was obliged to suppose the instance
of some exceedingly heavy fine. Such being the case, I
now come to a more important part of the question,
—namely, as to the time when the proposal is made,
and hero I roust ray that when the attention of the
Government has been salted to a defect in the law
of this country, and they are satisfied t! at an im-
provement con be wale in the lax, the proper time
to prepose the changes ti Parliament is c_rtainly
when that einviction Las been forced upon their
mind.. (Efear, hour.) The hon. and learned gen•le-
man referred to the expression " nolunios lag's Al/411;4
rettrgeri, an,l said we were going to change our new
without any reference to the usefulness et the change,
but b,canse Count Walewski had called attention to the
cotat ions fact that this crime was plotted and contrived
by persons in this country. With respect to Count
Welewaki, I would ask hoe. membera to place them-
helves in his poriti, u. It attteepta at assassination had
been concected in F, /ince, and if an endeavour had been
made to pet them into ,xecution in this country, and if
we had reason to believe that the law of France was not
enffirient to deter by its penalties from the corurnisenia
of such crime,, I think the Government of this country
would Lave been j-istly blame:Ole if the)' had riot called
the attention of the Governmet.t of France to what they
belitved to be a defect in the French law, not in the
imp:age of menace (and there is no nenace is Count
Walewelii's de-patch), but in term fa'rly pointing nut
the defer`, and eubtuitting it to the c inaideration of the
French Government. So the French Government bad
a right to ark us whether, in strict accordance with our
' lave-, legal and constiru•ional checks might not be inn-
pn.ed on the commi-eion of such crimes, arid in Count
WalewFki'e despatch, as we read it, there is or-thing to.
deta r us from doing a hat we were convinced onrse lees
ought to be done— tamely, to propose this Lid to Par-
liament, which would rffeet a useful amendment in the
law. We have been toll that Lord Hankcelonry held`
different language in 1302. New, I ask hon. gentlemen
to c mtrast the despatch of the French Minister of that
day with the despatch of Count IValewski. The /termer
de-patch was, as Lord Ifavikesbury observed, not
couched in very oenciliatory oanguege, but in terms of
the most effecsive nature, and contained demands, coupled
with menace to this country, calling on the Government
I. expel from the country certain persons derciihed by
name arid classes, and to re-triot the freedom of the
press, • in order that the Government might prevent the
insertion of articles eff,nsive to France. What 'tem
Lord Hawkesbury's dignified and proper reply I He
sail :--

" The French G.Jvorament must have formed an erroneous
judgment of the disposition of the Bri ish nation and of the
character of its Government, i they have been taught to
expect that any representation of a foreign power will cTer
induce them to consent to is violation of these rights on which
the liberties of the people of this country arc found.' '
One of tboee rights was the freedom of the press, and it
was to the laws affteting the press that t. S. passege
-referred. The Government of that day refused —al they
were bound to refuse—to propose to Parliament at the
dictation of a foreign government measures which would
fetter and restrict the liberty of the presr. But what
did Lord Havrkesbury do ? Did he refuse demands of
another kind which were made upon the E iglieh Govern.
tnent ? Far from it. At that time an Alien Act wee in
exieteece. and the Government esuld not say that the
law did not authorise them to dial with fure:go refugees
in a different manner from that iu which they were
enabled to deal with subjects of the realm, Si long as
an alien obeys the laws he is now free to abide in this
country ; but at that time an Alen Act was in existence,
and though the powers abide it conferred upon the
Government acre intended to enable them to maintran
the internal tranquility cf :his country, yet, feeling •th•
pressure of the demands made upon teens by France,
they mid send out of the kingdoms certain refugees ahoce
expulsion had been demanded by the French Minister ;
and they further intimated that if c'her refugees lama-
:flitted acts which, although complained of by the French
Government, were not punishable by law, they also
world be sent crit of the country. We have no power,
thank God ! to make such concessa, ne to any foreign
government. and wo do not ask for any such power.
Indeed, we Obould be ashamed of submitting such a pro-
position to Parliament, fir we know that it went(' be at
once repuniated. But Lord Elatekesbury, in refusing to
propose to Parliament, at the dictation of the Fiesta
Government, any bill .or altering the law with respect to
the press, declared the wi linguees of the British Govern.
meat to afford to every foreign governmental) the protec-
tion against Streit offences as were complained of—those
offences being itbele, and not assassinations—which the
principle of the laws and constitution of this connfrj would
rdtnit. Now, I a-k whether there is anythina in the
c rare° we are pursuing which contrasts unfavourably with
the course adopted by Lord Hawkeshury in le02? Is our
proposition contrary to the principles of the law and con-
stitutiee to propose that Parliament should enact that a
conspiracy to murder--that the crirue of inciting and in-
stigeting pereens to commit murder—shall be pithishable,
ewe capitally, but by penal servitude Or imprisonment of
tar. e years' duration at the discretion of the Court ? I
confidently assert that there is nothing in that proposition
which is in the slightest degree abhorrent to the principles
of our law and constitution. I have shown that the prate.
al
wi ink
s , and c t is
we
do
notentirelyn
hesitate—con s: oan consonant
swit h
the
we
rb
i e Pi
Ii
°u 's. principle'liab necessity°did(lf
i u
ourt
the
exists ists for such a proceeding—to ark
Parliament to render a similar law avelitchaebloeftnc to the Unit eld
Kingdom % . We den ask Son to It
t deterring n effect,
engaging direr will
but to impose puuiehment which we hope will exercise capital,
a
ei.
prevent base and bloody-minded
m
in such conspracies as I have referral
to. Allusion has been made to the despatch of Count
Walawski with reference to the insertion in the Moniker
of certain addresses presented to theEmperorof theFrencb.
Now, I am not hero to defend the publication of those
add resi,es. They were, I admit, insulting to this nation ;
they blue been deeply felt by the people of this
country. (Cheers ) Put even if no apology had been
made—if no regret had been expressed—for their
publication, I should hesitate to agree with those
who argue that, although we are convinced an amendment
of the law is required, yet on account of the iusertion of
these addresses in the Monitore we should abstain from
1 taking that wise, judicicue, and temperate course which,
independently of the publication of such addresses, we
should have been diTosed to adopt. I think the course of
a great nations should be inetevd of showing itself tco
sensitive to such CIP2SFOP.S as I have 111111 deli to, even
where they are supposed te have received the sanction of
the ruler of a country, whether powerful or weak—to hold
its own even way of legislation, and that if we are convinced
that an amendment of the law is necessary, which will
enable us to give a complete and satisfactory answer—or
what ought to be a complete and satisfactory answer—to
1 the complaints of foreign States, which will show them
that we do not harbour astessine but that we receive upo;
lour shot ea refugees of all political opinions, only render_
thorn liable, equally with our own subjects,
_to yereuucr
i intruded to deter them from the commis...l.l,g n'
This is, I
I an amendment of the law should be atiresec __ Sire of any.
I I i.,k, 0, ennr,:e wo ought to pursuelinrtrier
n:),ibowing
thing coat au.y 1...;,i,,, iii f.rc47 `: _ K.eaeet such isieulee
ourselves too sensitive to what iii:
01.,_
, -i is somewhat altered
as I have Mentioned. But the case for the French
sin a. this subjet fr t :s!nti:lc„.
cd_
not by her Majesty's
Governiecete co being 1 1