Star.
London, England, 1818-12-11 00:00:00

cammoN coUNGIL.

Yesterday a Court of Common Council was held
at the Council Chamber, Guildhall, for the purpose,
amongst other things, of "considering the propriety
of petitioning Parliament to revise the criminal ctide,
in which numerous petty offences are visited with the
same punishment as the most atrocious murders ;
and as minor offenders are seldom executed accord-
ing to law, crimes have been thereby increased rather
than diminished; and praying that a more rigorous
system of poison discipline may be adopted, whereby
capital punishment may be mitigated and criminals
reformed."

The knowledge that the above subject was to be
brought forward occasioned, a considerable influx of
strangers, and immediately after the Chair was taken
by the LORD MAYOR, the Court was crowded below
the Bar. After the minutes of the last Court had
been read, and some matters of minor importance
had been disposed of,

Mr. FAA'ELL rose to introduce the motion of which
he had given notice. He began by expres..ing a hope
that he should be ahle to adduce sufficient reasons
for the motion which he intended to submit to the
Court, and for the petition founded upon it, which
Was to be presented to the Honourable the House of
Commons. The question was one of considerable,
indeed of paramount importance, as every question,
must be which had for its object a material change
in the laws of a country. He would freely admit
',that no nation ought to consent to a change of es-:
tablished laws without the most-mature considera-:
don. That he had not run hastily upon the present.
measure would be obvious to all who recollected
that some moths had elapsed since it was first
brought before the notice of the Court. There could
not be any charge of premature action against him.
It was, however, fortunate that this delay had taken
place, for within the last few months, nay he might
add, within the last few days, the opiition of the
public seemed to have turned in support of his object.
The publi: mind was now perhaps in some degree,
from the influence of recent circumstances, particu-
larly turned towards the criminal code; and from the
concurrence of that general feeling with his own, he
anticipated the most complete slums. He would
admit, that it required some clear proof, to induce
any public body to depart from long established
laws and customs ; but he trusted he should be able
to adduce those proofs before he sat down. If in
performing this task he had to apologize for his own
insufficiency, not being a graduate of any of the Inns
of Court, yet at least he needed no apology for the
cause he advocated. The revisal of our criminal
code was a circumstance long looked for; the want
of it was long felt and acknowledged by the highest
authorities in the country. Its waiJ was felt in Par-
liament—it was admitted in Courtsof Justice—it was
proved by the decisions of Juries, and even by the
charges of Judges.' In fact, in every circle the evils
arising from the want of the revision, were admitted,
though it still happened that that revision was not
yet accomplished. In the task'svbkh hg bad under•..
taken he found that his laboters were very much
lightened by the exertions- of Akofe.whcetad graie
before him inthe pursuit of the.samesakiject, Resides'
the laudable exertions of seiietirtirttnent men, -be
had to acknowledge the povirerfut aid sif the public
press, from which this important cause had derived
much able support. The time seemed now w . be
arrived when something was. require'd tube done;
for when the authority of the Judgec,. armed with
the full powers of the laws, were insufficient th-tatisi
their due execution, then he conceived it was high
time that they should be revised. It was, he consi-
dered, a fortunate circumstance that the niattersvas
brought both) e the present Court—by no authority
could the matter in Its present stage be more coqi-
petently judged; for if the Parliament had-to try an
'issue upon one or all of those criminal laws, they
could not get a better Jury to decide, than that body
whom he had the honour of addressing. They were
all men of age sufficient to form a judgment. They
'were men interested in the protection of their fellow
citizens from every species of public or private vio-
lence—and that they were men of experience might
be deduced from the circumstance, that eight times
in every year the King issued his commission to the
,Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Recorder, for the trial
of such offences as should be committed within the
City and County; for though there were some of the
Judges of the land directed to assist, yet they were
only to be considered as assistants or assessors.—
From the acquaintance then of the citizens with the
laws in this manner, it could not be denied that they
were men who had some considerable experience in
them; yet, with all this, he was most willing to ad-
mit, that the subject was one of great difficulty ; and
it occurred to him, that on no former occasion did the
Court require to repeat that motto which be had seen,
Domine dirige nos: (the motto of the City Arms.)
He would freely admit, that at the termination of the
war, there was in general a large harvest of clime—
caused perhaps by the sudden change from prospe-
rous circumstances to those of adversity, which that
event was, calculated to produce. Many men on
such occasions became distressed who were before in-
dependent, and would have continued honest ; but it
too often happened, that poverty made the worst of
these rogues ; and hence it might be said, that war
and poverty were two great sources of crime. There
were certain species of-crime from which the feeling
mind turned on all occasions, and to which the ap-
-Iplication of the highest 'punishments of our laws
were not tco severe: these were murder, aggravated
midnight robberies, and others of that nature, which
went to destroy the very existence of society. These
were, as they ought to be, punishable with the ut-
most penalty ; but there were others which, though
highly reprehensible, and to which every effectual
check should be put, which he conceived did not call
for so severe a measure of punishment. When the
public authorities, acting for the whole community,l
deprived a fellow creature of life for one of these of-
fences, it should be considered that they, and not only
they, but the whole of those who had delegated their
united power to them, were answerable for- their con-
14uct before that DiviNk BEING, who would require
Irons their hands a strict account of that blood which
was shed without absolute necessity In saying thus
much upon the subject, he was aware that he had to
follow in the path of men who were infinitely supe-
rior to him in the meantof effecting the same object.
II: stood over the ashes of the dead, and he as a., con-

tented the Come would .L^ as inclined as he w
drop si tear to the memory of departew
Gar.34d he'
they recollected the vast exertions of thatgreat
good mad—he need hardly mention the name
et
inille--(cries (if hear Marl—whose coietata
seemed to have been to contribute in eve; y
the comfort and happiness of his fellow nen- ,
Companyhad fiin
ns talked
.w ti'
uponhiadiaSir
present Killian subject,j°a"6:t
ever found in him (Sir Samuel Romilly) the tree
dent seal fat the promotion of an oLject which
seemed to think so much required. in our laws. 7
loss of that excellent man; he had no doubt, u•as,
plored by the Common Council as emu • c,as by
country. they would, he felt satisfied, be
.
to pay every tribute of respect to his tresnose;
as he conceived, they cotdd not better do so tlss
emulating his humane example—by carrying ee
fect, as far as in them lay, that wish white' ere
dear to his heart—(Hear, hear.)—By rescuing
from undeserved punishment, be rescuing es
from vice, objects which wee foremost in v:
they would be erecting to his memory rnserate
Issiwe durable than billets of brass-01ra:-.
n for this digression from the pare
set but it was impossible to consider it with
associating the mite of that great man, who wet
iegir h
dlitiby ngi:ih humane attention
shednma. by
his
hioghn tocll everyaract thingera wb
and
statir
than
could tenchto alleviate the sufferings end Fear
the happiness of his fellow men (Hear, hear.)--tr
tering then upon the proof that the laws of e
I country Were more severe and less discriminae4g
`apportioning the punishment to the crime thani.
, other civilized nation, he should have occasice
'give to the Court the names of many of the ant
ties from which he drew his arguments. Wien.
mentioned this great severity and inequality of
English law, he did not wish to be understood
meaning to contend, that there were not other e
tries where the severity and inequality of the law
carried-to greater excess, but that there wes noLe,
try, possessing the same intelligence and civi:izatia
which carried these principles so far. •No dezet, ns
instances of unjust severity co':ld be iuldec
-Among the Hindoos, he had read that the crime
disturbing a Brahmin at a game of chess was r
nished with death, and that the same fate awer
him who gathered a particular spice before be
tribute! but he knew of no criminal laws in
among civilized.nations that were to severe as
of Eirgland. He supported his areument by r
ring to the authotities of Sir Thomas Moore, th
ron Montesquieu, Dr. Johnson, Mr. Justice
stone, Mr. Fox, Mr. Pitt, Dr. Pair, teed Gre.
Earl Grey, Lord Holland, Marquis of Lens/pyre,
Ponsonby. Mr. Wilberforce, and many others. The
Master of the Rolls, Sir William Grant, he named
the first witness he would call. On his authority.
sliewed that the harshness of the punishment away
operated to prevent proseciiime and to indnceJ
to let the accused escape with impunity, by
upon themselves to exercise a discretion never
in them. He had given it as his opinion, that in
tidy aimed 'tete of civilization which this country,
attained, -the-penishment of death was too severe
be. iedided. for many of those offences for which
:141.4t0w -awarded. - The Emperor Alexander
,hitmeztvviteess. He had abolished the punisle
of death in his dominions; excepting in cases of
son and murder. He would nest call the
ttorpev-General. lie .was disposed to new
Gristinallessae in_ anienstance. It, seemed curie
that in the case of the foulest murder that had
beewconansittedu-of,Strurder axed rape—the acs
should ebezistiffered .to . escape through the
of Wager of Bated!—The Attorney-General
given notice, that. he meant to move for leave
bring in a bill to alter this law. There he mi,
mean to stop ; but he (Mr.. Favell) should pahaes
able, by 'and bye, to sheer that there were a few e
laws which wanted revising as well as that. Sir '
Blackstone and-Mr. Fox had beep favourable to
a revision ; and. Mr. Wilberforce had stated it to I
been the wish e(e)lr, rat to subnie the whole Pe
Code tc the revision of some able lawyer. To di
the increase of crime, he then read from the C. 7
Returns the lists.of convictions, committals, and
cutions, -within the last six years, for London
-Middlesex. Froth these Returns, it would be see.s.
there had been a great increase of crime, and e:
daily of juvenile delinquency. The committals,
would be seen, exceeded in the last year kose
1805 in more than the ratio of three to one. Besi.
these' he added, there was to be observed the w
derful increase in the crime of forgery, which
and was, in fact, spreading, as it were, in proport
to the severity with which it was visited. Theme
bet of forged. Ll Bank-notes.discovered by the -Bank,
of England, between January 1, 1814, and April 1%
11$18, were as follow :
Years. Amount. Years. Annan.
1814
1815 • 14,085 t 1817 • 18,451
And from January 1, to April 10,
From
the
mhte
increaseis
this, he conceived,
of capitalnceive p
it fairlymuingishhtmbeentswas non denducede.e,
that
hest, nor et-all a good mode, of suppressing crime.
The Noble Secreteij of State had said the ebjectice
to the severity of the laws were answered by Elf; cir-
cumstance of its being competent for the prcseceter
to reduce the value of the property stolen, and dee
punish_ an offender for the smaller offence.
however, he objected to. If he were robbed of
petty to the amount cif £5, and prosecntesl the die:
for stealing to the amount
.of thirty-nine shilliree,
he was guilty of 'something very Eke perjury. Tie
came before the Coart with a lie in his mouth, at xc
was sworn to " tell the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing hut the truth." Some of the existing lees
were so little suited to the times, that they we:e
solutcly ridiculous. There was one, for instant,
Iwhich precluded the Lord Mayor of London Eyes
having more than two courses at his table; and the
was another for the encouragement of Our woes
manufactories, by ivhich coats were forbidden to
made too scanty! He thought ou eels Statute
should prosecute the Gentlemen Dandies for ee
wearing coats
.provided with the legal broad cont,
.totismal flaps. There were also laws forbiddietel
old discharged soldier to ask alms in his red cr.;
and for granting benefit of clergy in certain we;
in which, according to these, a man, if able to eel
his name, though convicted of a capital °Tree
ought not to be hanged. The severity of tier le:
had long Leto a nzettcr of complaint.

•
OIL
• Rant
tioit
• 1111
tot
17 the P'
t
44. '
le L pools
sr best
4 isbnv
1-• yariet
!as(' • to
oftthe u
edit
• :
• e, ller
• .er,
CTI,.. is /cm
e yr
V.e.l. or al
inlet; fJu
cri
puoi
• , J.
rai n Ably
states. men
e
mar,• uc
s dt
EX. at
e tr
an s, i alipi
sien beved
isnhe• j 1 fia
Jul
of Of chi
t°°2 bills
ccll the s:
gar
ao cc. what
the .•1
that
cot 1
.rirte spin
111 S r. goo 4
await then
be 1)..t; Lig
s • num
• pun
rise coo
, the E. cou
e Mac rea
ireav --c
wue, li of 1
Ile w 2,
tamed ed,
ority.. kip
avvird NI
.ceJ•.:r:t
v takil cal
er wl
tat in 1.. G,
mery to
severe
Ider se
nishrn
softie
r p
evise • 7
curie.
hale-
e acc;irso t
he La
ker4l . • •
leave
ce. .
nug 1
chaos
few ot
Sir W
le ta c•.
it to ha
At Pets,
To she
Criml-
, and et
tdon 111
see.
Ind es -
tittali,.
tre
the wor,
h seeme
Toport:,.
The nem-

whit t, that he wastrae.st.
der sentence of (loath -for
whirled his hat round the
Tore he could be prevaike
rants. He next adverse
rivntely stealing, and ft)s
ive shillings out of a shop.
thority of Lord Grenville
oportionate to the offence.
zing crime was to make its
h not unnecessarily severe.
acient and modern, he re 7
i position. The inequality
Le laws he shewed from the
different periods, and be-
the same offence—that of
is sentenced by Mr. Justice
months imprisonment ; the
surrendered on hearing of
!sting to be dealt with in tilt.
:e Gould taking a different
:need him to transpottation
:ontended, at great length,
wally repressed by severity
beea in many instances sup-
were too severe, they inva-
etter. He had no wish to
mike dunge..ns comfortable
ounishment of crime certain,
t to the offence committed.
they could not he executed.
fudge, Sir Vicary Gibbs. on
:sling five shillings worth of
I to the Jury, that if they be-
t bad, they would be justified
lty—thos pointing out to the
im escape the excessiverigour
a Jury had found two good
10, and eight Bank notes to
under forty shillings in value.
id refused eight guineas for
'as found guilty of stealin74 to
logs. It would thus be seen
h cases fnade by Juries, and
Ford had given it as his
tecutions did not produce that
upon by those who favothed
ment by night, or labour dur-
of which prisoners were die
!sent there were '2OO crimes
t was impossible that so many
one severe punishment. He
orities to the many he had al-
'your of a less sanguinary code
I have for its object the reform
ate individuals had shewn this
Lettsoin had, he believ-
men the means of reforming a
the most striking case he had
urnished by the Rev. Rowland
I Gentleman preached the fune-
who had been his servant, and
had well discharged his duty to
:he close of the Sermon he had
L, that he had then to state what
s lips before—that that man had
on the highway. .There was a
al that made a favourable im-
. Hill), and after some resistance
e had told the man to canon him.
his servant, and was completely
olutions which he had' to submit
to call for a general revision cf
the country. Ile had to remark,
was with him in this, for he had
g..one of Sir S. Romilly's
these Bills in every year, why
dtee to examine the whole coder
nt period, one of profound peace,
the new Parliament as offering a
nteringaipon this important work.
great principles, he would call
i to the prev.ention of crime.—
s and moral principles and laws—
, but invincible when collectively'.
spirit of the laws contained not the
eir execution was impossible. This
of the most eminent men in the
n world. It was asserted by Plato,
ilontesquieu, and by the most emi-
orities. Es en our immortal Shak-
!d—

for use ; in time Ole rod
-,,:ked than feared. So our decreer,
t, to themselves are dead !"
her then paid an eloquent etilogium'
efforts of Mrs. Fry ; and observed,
nt conversations with the unhappy
!red for forgery, they all dwelt on
hich the uncertainty of punishment
would not trespass longer on the
rt, as any thing he had omitted to
loabted not, be well suppled by the
would second his Resolutions, who
ersonal friend of the benevolent
n read a series of Resolutions which
•inci ral topics of his speech.—(See
I tlr•• first page.)
s, in rising to second the Motion, in
the request of the Worthy Mover,
e had no wish to offend any man ;
hat one statement advanced by his
could not be contradicted, namely,
I increased nearly fourfold within a
owed that some inquiry should take
!ct to the cause of such an extraordi-
The late distress of the country could
it, because this increase had occurred
essively advancing before that distress
h, no doubt, had been done •by the Bi-
d the Sunday Schools, to promote the
•tut and to check the progress of vice.l
g to bear testimony to the utility of
n,, hut he would ask, if so many crimes
nitted notwithstanding their existence,
re taken place if they had never been
'his was a serious question, in the con-
which the mind was naturally led to
the proposition before the Court. In
11 persons and parties, whatever their
)ns might be, ought to feel a particular
mest—t.)r, the increase of crimes be-
mer proportion or precedent being
Ntablished, it behoved that Court or
• of Englishmen, to consider what
l be arplicd to so serious an evil.—

lit considering• the stature of this remedy, he hop .
that the subject would be discussed with temperan
and that Gentlemen ba each side .Would' have the
justice to ascribe of inions. to those nimives only,
which candour and liberality would war asst
for
;his was a case upon which party 'teeli kt could Got
fairly be supposed to operate—the public mini uni-
versally calling for its consideration, while there
could be little doubt what decision that mind had
formed on the subject. And this decision ought not,
could not he disregarded by considerate men. For,
however the mind of the public might be occasionally
misled by mistaken or designing men, it would be
absurd to sui.pose that upon any question of great
national interest, the judgment of the public was
likely to be erroneous—(hear, hear); and it was no-
torious that the increase of crimes of late years was
deemed by the public o proceed from the extreme
'punishment presciibed by our Criminal Code. For
(humane beings, naturally revolting at the punishment
'•
ot death which that code annexed to comparatively
Ismail crimes, rather acquiesced in the impunity of
those-crimes, than institute any prosecution, or pro-
Imote the infliction which that Code denounced. To
illuvrrate the wickedness of disposition which the
severity of our Penal Code was calculated to produce,
the worthy Member quoted a paragrao, which he
had this day read in one of the Public Journals. Ac-
cording to this paragraph, two men being sentenced
to death.fOr a clime of comparatively small enormity,
one of them exclaimed to-the other, " what a hen-
hearted fellow you were not to let me put that fellow
mead the way, who could alone have informed against
us." So here was a case in which a man to guaid himself
against a conviction for a minor offence, was willing
to commit the heinous crime of murder ; and was not
this instance a ,strong illustration of the mischievous'
character of our penal code? it appeared from' the
StAue tent of the worthy mover, that the punishment,
of death was denounced against no less than 200 of-
fences, and was not this, prima facie, objectionable,
for the whole could not possibly be deserving of the
same degree of, punishment. Notoriously indeed
they were not all deserving of the highest punish-
ment which the law could inflicx—theo why should
our laws be allowed is reiriaVillluch a state. But
our penal laws were in fact not,,Osii eiCeptionable in
equity and humanity, than iidicAdh.V.s. to common
sense; for what was to theitighi'Ot a statute upon
our hooks which consigned any one Capitol punish
meat who should-be found guilty of aiding Or assist-
ing hobgoblins ?—( Hear, hear! and a laugh.)':4-le
agreed with the opinion that a great deal of the de-
pravity which led to the multiplication et crimes was
owing to the licentiousness that prevailed in our pri-
sons. Much mischief resulted too from theinal-ad,
ministration of the law, through the ignorance and:
inattention, and 'sometimes the misapplied clemency
of the Magistracy.—This observation he meant to
apply rather to country Ma iistrates, for .he, did'
not mean to impute any thing irregular...to, the
worthy Alderman who acted for this cisi..: But
even of these worthy Aldermen, he must say,
that through their facility to pardon minor of-
fences, they too- often contributed to the commis-
sion of greater crimes. Another cause of the preva-
lent depravity and consequently increased criminality
of the times, was the toleration of those numerous
prostitutes who at present patrole the streets, Ano
ther great *cause of the evil was the licentiousness
which prevailed in ;he prisons. If, instead of con-
demning criminals to death, they were confhied
iji
prison tinder proper regulations, and compelled, as
they ought in certain cases, to work for the purpose
of indemnifying those from whom they stole any
property, a much greater good would, he was con-
vinced, be done to the cause of public morality, than
by septencing such criminals to death. The prisons
in this country ought, in fact, to be regulated as those
on the Continent notoriously were. There was a
prison at Ghent which he had seen, and which he be-
lieved had also been examined by a worthy Alder-
man (Wooe), in which prison from 800 to 1000 pri-
soners were confined, under such a system of classifi-
cation and regulation as was pecUliarly calculated
for the reform of prisoners, and the consequent pre-
vention of crime. But in this country the youngest
offenders were confounded with the oldest, and bus
the disposition to crime was.•rather propagated than
repressed. lie was Sorry that the prisons of this
country, and especially those of this city, were not
under a similar government. He was also sorry
that, in order to guard against the crime to which
poverty too often' prompted, there were not asylums
in this country as oh the Continent, at which
both males and •females could demand employ-
ment and thus by the produce of their own la-
bour, save themselves from absolute want—( Hear !)
The question before the Court was, he observed, of
such a nature, that men of all parties should, and he
hoped they would, look at it with a calm good feel-
ing, free from any party spirit. If the Gentlemen
who heard him really loved their country, he trusted
they would prove it by their conduct in this case, for
it was truly a case in which, to use the language of
an eminent seaman—" England ex pests every man
to do his duty." Hence he expected that that Cou
nt
would unanimously adopt the proposition o
worthy Friend, and thus excite the Legislature to
look the whole of this important question directly in
the face. He had had the honour of a personal- ac-
quaintance with the philanthropic Howard, from
whom he had imbibed, in early life, chinch rnciples
as could never be cancelled. By those prples he
-was naturally prompted to follow the example of his
distinguished friend. He therefore never visited any
town without examining its prisons, and he had, seen
many prisons on the Continent which presented gene-
rally a very striking contrast to those which he had
seen in this country. But yet he had seen some pri-
sons in this country peculiarly worthy of praise from
the manner in which they were conducted. He in-
stanced particularly that of Bury St. Edmund's, the
system of which, as well as that of Lancaster, it
would be well for the ether county prisons of Eng-
land, as well as those of this City, all of which he had
seen, most studiously to imitate.
Mr. JACKS could not forbear from stating his dis-
sent from the Motion, as well as from most of the
sentiments by which it was supported. The worthy
Mover had alleged, that there had been a long and
loud outcry for the revision of the Penal Laws; but
for himself, he must say, that he had never heard of
this outcry, unless from Sir Samuel Romilly and his
adherents. Against this outcry, however, he recol-
lected that :k great majority of both Houses of Par-

•
Ilament was decidiidirdpOosed :he also remembered
that at the time Sir Samuel Rental); brought for-
ward hts peopositions, the Judges, who were con,
suited, were unanimously against his views; so, in-
deed, were the Recorder and the Common Serjeant
of this City—and the latter still retained the .same
objection;as he (Mr. Jacks) learned from him within
the last half hour. Here, then, was practice against
theory. If, then, his worthy Friend who brought
forward the Motion had rather consulted the opinion
of Parliament and the Judges, and that of practical
men generally, than that of the visionary speculators
whose judgment he had quoted, his decision would,
the could not help thinking, have been much more
I correct. The worthy Mover had stated, that the
Criminal Code of this country was more sanguinary
than any that had ever existed; but, surely, when his
worthy Friend made this assertion, he had forgotten
the, laws of Menu, the Indian Legislator—of Draco,
of Solon, of Lycurgus, of the Twelve Tables of Rome,
as well as the laws of Augustus and of Justinian.
Mr. FAVELL begged to correct the worthy Gentle-
man, by calling to his recollection that what he had
said was this, that the criminal laws of England were
more sanguinary than those of any nation in the civi-
lized world.
Mr, JACKS resumed, and obsers'ed, that he should
next advert to the laws of Moses, which be presumed
the worthy mover would admit to be the laws of the
civilized world.—Here the speaker recited some of
the laws of Moses, especially those denouncing the
punishment of death against blasphemers and adul-
terers, and was proceeding in his recital, when he
was called to order by
Mr. DISON, who deprecated the attempt to read
all the Bible in Court.
Mr. Jecits complained of interruption, as he had
not trespassed long upon the attention of the Court,
while he had listened very patiently to the speech of
the worthy Mover. He did not mean much longer
ll
to occupy the time•of the Court. He was adverse to I
any general proposition for the revision of our Penal I,
Laws, if any particular law were deemed objection-
able,-let the repeal of that law be proposed. It was
open to any Member of Parliament to make the pro•
position, as Mr. William Smith had done the repeil--
of the law respecting the Trinity. He understood
from the Common Serjeant, that with regard to those
laws which had been repealed upon the proposition
of Sir Samuel Romilly, the crimes to which they
had applied had since multiplied no less than four-
fold ; and it was notorious, that since the relakation,
of the Bank of England with respect to such persons
as pleaded guilty to the charge of forgery, the crime
of fbrgery had increased to an alarming extent. As
to the abuses of prisons, he concurred with what had
fatten from the Gentlemen on the other side ; for he
fully believed, that the less of licentiousness, and the
More of employment and classification that existed
in prisons, the more crime Was to be prevented and
'morality -promoted. He, therefore, recommenc'ed
that all the prisons of London should be amalga-
mated ; and, among the whole, the classification and
regimen desired might be easily established.
Mr. RICHARD TAELOR—(the Gentleman who suc-
ceeded Alderman Waithman as Common C. uncil-
man for the Ward of Farringdon Without.)—" Irise,
my Lord Mayor, -with great diffidence, this being
the first time of my taking part in the deliberations
of the Court, to express my sentiments on a subject
in which 1 feel no common interest, and shall there-
rfore rely on the indulgence of the Court for any im-
perfection in the observations which I have :o make.
The worthy Gentleman who has just spoke., has en-
deavoured to justify the severity of our Criminal
Code, by horrible details of the cruel laws of barba-
rous ages and heathen nations ; but, my Lord, is it
not our boast that we live In an enlightened age and
in a Christian country ? I cannot but feel ninth sur•
pr ise, that when the worthy Gentleman so frequently
appealed to the maxim, An eye for an eye, and a
tooth for a tooth,' as being the principle of so many
ancient codes, and of that of Moses among the rest,
this should never have called to his mind those
words of our SAVIOUR, " It hath been said by them
of old—An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a
tooth ;---but I say unto you, love your enemies
Indeed, this seems to me to be a most powerful argu-
ment for a mitigation of the severity of our laws,
whether that severity be justifiable or not, that in
proportion as the influence of Christian principles in-
creases, it is found more difficult to carry these laws
into execution. I object, therefore, to our Criminal
Code, because it grows still more inefficacious, for as
the feelings and principles of those who have to ad-
minister the laws, revolt against their severity, they
cannot be carried into execution. When death is
the punishment apprehended, prosecutors and wit-
e ses are unwilling to appear, Juries will not con-
vict, and Judges will not condemn. In many cases
Judges themselves direct Juries to evade the capital
part of the offence, by fixing a false value on the
thing stolen: thus mercy is shewn by a legal quibble,
instead of being inherent in our laws. Impunity then
is the general consequence of the excessive severity of
our laws ; and where but one in a hundred who
commit capital offences actually suffer death, it can-
not be wondered at, that those who are entering
upon a. criminal course should reckon upon escaping
where the chances are so much in their favour.
There is another consideration, my Lord, upon which
-I am sure I need not dwell in •this place. which is,
that it should be the tendency of punishments to res
form the guilty, as well as to deter from crime. But
t is evident, that when we cut off our erring brother
in the midst of his guilt, reformation is out of the
question. Again, I object to so many offences being
made capital, as producing a rnonstious inequality of
punishment. Three men, for stealing one sheep,
have suffered the same punishment which the law
inflicts oa murder or parricide. A very serious ob-
jectiost to the punishment of death, which has not, I
'7lelieve, been touched upon by the Gentlemen who
have preceded me, seems to me to arise from its not
being remissible. Excellent as is the administration
of our laws, it cannot be free from errors. Men have
sometimes been convicted of crimes of which they
have afterwards been proved to have been innocent ;
and for all other punishments some atonement may
be made: but how dreadfully aggravated is the cala-
mity of an undeserved punishment, when that punish-
ment has been death, whcih precludes all compensation?
When the sad sentence of the law is carried i.:to exe-
cution, it seems to me, my Lord, that the effect is
most deplorable upon all classes of society. Those
who are prone to ill, so far from being cbcckcd in

i evil coutsdt; ire- hatcletieti and bittatizeii
theee hoitid exliibitlons. Can Ott ty tine have obseteidd
she conduct and conversation of the shreugs return-
tng from them, when the bchaeioui and sufferings of
the criminal are the subject of many a coarse joke,
without being struck by this? Though I tr,ver wit.
nessed an execution, I have had sufficient ~pportuni,
tics of learning, that those who ate going on most
rapidly in a career of depravity, are most frequent in
their attendance on these occasions. And with those
of better feelings, what is the effect, my Lord, but to
excite sympathy for criminals, and disapprobation
of the laws? I shall not, I trust, be understood to
desire impunity for critnieals. I conceive my argu-
' menu to have exactly the opposite tendency. But
surely it would be desirable that our punishments
should be such as even the best of mankind would.
concur in inflicting ; such as, while they deterred
from crime, even a kind regard for the guilty, and
an earnest desire to reform them, would justify to
the most benevolent mind. Surely such moderate,•
equal, and certain punishments, would be more
likely to repress crime than the present system,
where one is punished with horrible severity, and
ninety-nine escape with impunity. But the worthy
Gentleman who preceded me has said—' How then
will you punish, or what would you substitute
He has himself furnished an answer, in wharhe has
said in favour of improving the discipline of our.pri•
sons, agreeing with what was urged by my friends
near me, as to converting them into places of refor-
mation. The substitutes which have long been found
efficacious in other countries, might surely he tried
M this. The worthy Gentleman has also had recourse
to an usual topic, on questions of this kind, and de-
precated any innovation upon systems which have
the sanction of great antiquity. But, my Lord, why
is that innovation only to be decried which is on the
side of mercy ? Is not every new enactment by which
a crime is made capital; an innovation ? And the wor-
thy Gentleman is, I believe, mistaken as to the anti-
quity of •our present Criminal Code, in supposing
that it has lasted a thousand years—whereas, for A
long period after that date, I think not more than fair
nr five crimes were capital by the laws of England.
"11 e laws annexing death to so great a, multitude of
offences are, I believe, comparatively of late date. If
then innovation be a ground for objection, surely we
may be allowed to petition that our Criminal Law
may be purged from the injurious consequences of
these sanguinary innovations. N ith these views, mz
Lord, I shall give my hearty support to the motion.
Mr. DIXON, in remarking upon the motion, denied
that we had any Criminal Code in England.. There
were, no doubt, several statutes upea the subject of
crime, but it could not be said that we had what u as
called a Criminal Code. The increase of crimes of
late was owing, in his opinion, to the increased els-
tress of the times, which produced a want of employ-
ment, and therefore, however he admired engines of
extraordinary mechanical powers, he lamented their
tendency to deprive human beings of emrloyme-t.
He also thought, that a great deal of the muidplica-
ttion of crime was owing to the forgery of smt-11
Bank-notes. Therefore, he thought if desirable, that
no Notes .under I:5 should be issued in future. That
the Penal Laws should be mitigated, he was willirg
to admit; but he would not agree to the establishment
of any, fixed 'tale of punishment for crimes of the same
description, because that would be to exclude mercy
where peceliaicircumstances Might occur to call for it.
Here'the worthy Member adverted to the deficiency
of the law, especially In that fragment of barbarism,
the law with regard to seif-destruction. The abo-
minable character of this law, which was never
dealt equally towards rich and poor, was, he obser-
ved, most forcibly illustrated in the rece.ttly shocking
treatment of the unfortunate Spaniard, Mann= Le
Castro...--He wished punishment fei theft to be In-
flicted on him who made a livelihood by it, rather
than on the unhappy being who might be urged by
extreme want to commit one solitary offence.
_ Mr. PATTEN said a few words on the'necesaity of
proportioning punishments to crimes, bet was obl; test
to sit down, the cries of " Question atestion
be-
came so loud.
• Mr. Otvitnat tliou7lit the best remedy for th^ ex-
isting evil would be found in enforcing an an ebser-
vance of moral and religious duties on those com-
mitted to prison.
The Resolutions were then read seriatim, moved,
seconded, and adopted tinanitnously.
In the course of the day it was by the Court tot
don Parliament to extend the power of tlse Court of Requests.

ConeNee's Loaursz.--Joseph Pelham, a carman at the Lon-
dou Docks, having been pteviously ill, was, cra Saturday morn-
ing, about eleven o'clock, seized with a ht, and seemed to the
approaching' and to Mr. Chapman, an Officer at tle.Docks, fast
rt his last hour.. He placed deceased *under the
lodge, ar.d applied to the adjacent Poor-house.' Saw both the
Churchwardens and the resid.ent Deadk. Tuey refused to
mit him, saying, " We, know our duty." It was urged, with-
out effect, that lie was a parishioner. During the converavidu
deceased reline stagg,•ring towards the Woriehout.: application
was renewed; •but .the Beadle said he could not be admitted
without an order from the Upper Warden. At half-past two,
deecasrd had crawled back to the Dock-Eaccs. Mr. Chapman
applied to a neighbouring Parish; they set., thdr Beadles, w!.O
conducted him once more to the adjacent Workhouse, to thew
Parish We.rkiouse was half a mile distant. Again it was stated
that he was a parishioner, which was confirmed by the by-etw.s.
tiers. The Officer then replied, " I cannot help it ;
,the man
must be passed in the regular way." The Beadles front tbc
fore-mentioned Parish observed, " Yost art acting with 010
greatest inhumanity probably before' be reaches our Poor-lao-wec,
he will die." Deceased was then shiking all over; and had tea
apnearanceOf being id a dying state. Fiedir:g their epplicatic*
useless, each of the Beadles took an arm of the deceased, and
surported him towards their own Poor-house. Ori his antral
there be war seized with a fit, and instantly died. -A mediell
Gentleman stated, that he found the deceased affected with s'..-
gours, from which, and other symptoms, be concluded it war •
case of hydrocephalus. He went down to the first-menticmcd
Workhouse, and heard the altercation : the Officer refusing ad-
mission, asked whether be considered the deceased ins vary
dangerous states? Ile said that he did or was asked if he was
in inuninent danger ; and replied he w-s not. The Officer then
observed, " It is really painful to me to refuse admittirg
but the law will not permit Mr to act otherwlse."—The Glioseta.
said, that whatever was inhunian was Mega]. It was char that
every person in eztrtraity, whetter a stranger or a parishioner,
must, if necessary, be received irto the nearest Workhouse,
and, not removed thence:until it can be done with safety. ear
individual feseir.g a Wet Tenon into the street, and death ens.-
ing, bad been held to-be gags)* of wilful murder. This cooed
not go to that extent, bat there was El:kW= ground for
charge of misdemeanour; that was for the consideration of
parish. Verdict--. Died by the 'Cis:vs.:lon of Goa.
SMITHFIELD MARKET, DEG
• Beef 4s Od• to Ss 04 I Veal 56 to 7a
platten .. ~5s Od to is ed Vbrk
Want 7VI-;-Calves 160—Sheep and Lambs 4480—rigs
HAY AND sviv.v PER I•I'AD.
.€5 Ps to 411 et pt:::-N ...E2 10s to 2 les
eltifct o tls to 90* cs cob t 4)