Star.
London, England, 1818-02-25 00:00:00

FOROZRIZS.

Sir J. MACKINTOSH rose to move for certain
Papers, relating to the Prosecutions instituted by the,
Bank for Forgery. The object he had in view was to
ascertain whether the present system of paper money
had a tendency to multiply the crime of forgery.
He wished to obtain a return of the number of per-
sons prosecuted for forgery, distinguishing those
convicted and executed in the fourteen years pre-
ceding the year 1797 ; and a similar return for the
whole period which had elapsed since the passing of
the Bank Restriction Act. Part of this information
he proceeded to shew was already before the House.
lie would state a fact which he thought would sur-
prise the House. It had been foreseen that the Bank
Restriction Act would increase the number of forge
ries of Bank notes, but if any man had said it would
increase them one hundred fold, he would have been
charged with such an exaggeration as must have
taken from his statemeneall credit. Such, however,
it would be found, was the effect of that measure.—
During the fourteen years before the year 1797 there
were but four prosecutions for forgery instituted by
the Bank. In the 14 ysars which followed, from 1797
to 1811, there had been no fewer than 438 prosecutions.
—The crime of forgery, it appeared, had thus been
centupled, or increased one hundred fold, by the in-
troducing small notes into circulation. lie thought
there could hardly be a more important question
before the House than this, which went to ascertain
at what an expense of human blood this system had
been hitherto maintained, and must be maintained at
hereafter. The House ought to know how far it went
to the multiplication of crime. They sometimes con-
soled themselves with the thought that their time was
occupied in framing laws to amend mankind. They
were, he doubted not, sincere in their wish to do this,
but he thought inconsistent in their conduct. If
against the benefits conferred by other measures
which they had passed, the evils should be set which
had resulted from the Bank Restriction Act, he fear-
ed the balance would be against them. lie thought
it ought to move for similar Returns of the Prosecu-
tions instituted against Persons forging the Coin of
the Realm, as it might be that the increase in the
forgeries of paper, had but corresponded with the
decrease of those of gold and silver. He knew not
whether it was so or not; but he thought on both
subjects the House ought to have full information.
Mr. BENNET suggested that the return should be
made to comprehend persons committed for forgery.
Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH then moved for Ac-
counts of the number of persons committed or prose-
cuted for forging Bank Notes, or for possessing or
uttering them, knowing them to be forged, specifying
the number sentenced to death, or otherwise, from
the Ist January 1816, to the 20th February 1818.—
He afterwards moved for returns of the prosecutions
for forgery instituted by the Bank in the 14 years
preceding 1797, and in the 14 years following, and
also for similar returns of the prosecutions instituted
by the Officers of the Mint within the same periods.
Mr. GRENFELL thought it would be desirable to
know what proportion of such prosecutions had been
instituted against those whose forgeries were confined
to small notes. It was most obvious, that many of
,these forgeries werocoauoitoid by low peawassr-u,ba
would not have been likely so to have committed the
crime of forgery, had none but notes of higher value
been in circulation. He suggested to the Honourable
Gentleman the propriety of so framing his motion as
o make this distinction.

Mr. LOCKHART thought it was not desirable to
treat this subject so as to excite undue commiseration
for those who committed the crime of forgery : gene-
rally, he thought, greater compassion was excited in
favour of the guilty, than indignation against the
crime. He wished some alteration. to be made in
Bank Notes, that it might not be so easy to forge
them. He was of opinion that something might be

invented that the public would be able to know by
the eye, and the Bank by their private mark—a
something which, from its colour and the quality of
the paper, could not be easily imitated.

Sir J. MACKINTOSH contended there was no-

thing in the present Motion that could inspire im-
proper compassion for the guilty. He should be as
.unwilling as any one to diminish the terrors or weaken
the atthority of the criminal law. He would admit
that no circumstances of temptation could justify the
commission of crime. But when the law-giver, by
injudicious measures, held out a temptation to crime,
he participated in the moral guilt of the offender.—
This was a position which he would not give up.
General THORNTON said, he had wished two
years ago that Bank-notes should be so executed,
that it would be more difficult to imitate them. If
the Bank were to go to a greater expense in getting
them well executed, many forgeries, he was inclined
to think, might be prevented.
The Motions were severally agreed to.
MISCELLANEOUS.

General G ASCOIGNE presented a Petition from the Tan-
ners and other persons concerned in the Leather Trade at Liver-
pool, praying a repeal of the additional Duties on Leather. Read,
and ordered to lie on the table, and be printed, after a few words
from Mr. BENSON, on the necessity of repealing this dtity.
. .

•
. . -
Mr. BENNET moved for leave to present a Petition from a
person named Virhitatey, one of those arrested in Yorkshire.—
Being brought up and read, itcomplained of hard treatment, and

pray;cl redress.—Ordered to lie on the table.
The Honourable Gentleman then presented another Petition
It was from R.. Lee, of Holmfirth Yorkshire, who was confined

in lrons for twenty weeks in York Castle, where he was placed
in the ce„11 in which a person named Riley had previously cut his
throat. Ile trusted inquiry would be made into the truth of
the allegations contained in the Petition. The Petition prayed
for relief, and against any Bill of Indemaity.—Ordered to lie
on the table.

Mr. BENNET postponed hit motion which stood for to-
morrow, till Monday next.
Sir E. BRYDGES moved that there should be laid before the
house an account of the number of folio, quarto, octavo, and
duoderimo volumes or pamphlets, received from Stationers
Hall, by the British Museum, under the last Copy-right Act,
between the Ist of January and the 31st of December, 1817,
distinguishing the number of each size.
After a few words from Mr. BA ti EA, the motion was agreed to.
On tht motion of General HARTI4I certain returns connected
with the Excise of Ireland, ordered in the last Sessions but not
yet presented, were ordered to be produced forthwith.
The Kilmainhans Hospital Bill was read a second time and
ccrnrnitted for to-morrow.
Genetal TIIORNTON, seeing the Otairman of the Commit-
tee of Finance in his place, wished to ask if any question had
come before the Committee, on the loss sustained by the iteve.
nue from the absence ofißri;ish subjects in foreign parts, and on
the means of supplying tke skate.
Mr. 1). GILBERT said, no such question had been before the
Committee, nor did he know that such was I:key to occupy their
attsattost—Adjourne4.