Star.
London, England, 1821-05-24 00:00:00

knew no suck crime as privately itealing on naviga-
ble rivers. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman
also adverted to an erroneous statement in the Re-
port of the conduct of a Jude at Chelmsford, in not
having recommended a criminal _capitally convicted
for a first offence to mercy; now, on inquiry, it ap-
peared that so far from being a first offence, there was
eight indictments against him at that Session. He
mentioned these circumstances to prove the inaccu-
racy of the Report, and argued therefrom that it was
not deserving of implicit confidence from the House.
He must now look to the Bill of his Honourable
Friend, which went to take away capital punishment
for the first forgery, in every instance, except as re-
garded the notes of the Bank of England. Thus,
then, capital punishment would be taken away for
the forgery of a will, a forgery most easy of accom-
plishment, and by which whole families might be
ruined. So also as regarded the forgery of marriage
registries, by which whole families might be bastar-
dized or disgraced. The forgeries also of transfer of
stock would escape, though for thousands in amount.
He knew it would be said, that anciently the punish-
ment of death did not attach to forgery—true it aas
that it did not ; but a punishment almost as severe as
death did attach : for, by the Statute of Elizabeth, a
person convicted of forgery was to make restitution
to double the amount, his goods and chattels were to
be confiscated, he was to be imprisoned and to stand
in the pillory, to have his nose slit, and to be branded;
and thus the law continued till the reign of George
H. when the present law was enacted. The crime
of forgery had much increased, and a law was
enacted making it a capital offence. The reason was,
because the Statute of Elizabeth was not aipplitable.
The Bill was passed for only five years ; but in the
course of a year a new Bill became necessary, and
as the law was found to be effectual, it was made
permanent. He had in favour of the present system
experience of nearly a century. He would ask, what
was the ground for the alteration of the law ? and it
appeared to him that an irresistible case should be
made out. But all that the present preamble said was,
that the existing law was ineffectual. That he de-
nied ; and though some cases of private forgery
might go unpunished, still the law on the whole was
effectual. By the present Bill, transportation for a
certain number of years, or for life, would follow
upon conviction. But transportation was hardly re-
garded as a punishment; and in many cases the con-
vict had been known to thank the Jadge for the sen-
tence of transportation. In many cases, a man in-
tent on the commission of a forgery, would say, I
may succeed without' detection, and afterwards live
in affluence; and if detected, the punishment at the
worst is but transportation. At present, the crimi-
nal was aware, that in the case of detection there was
no hope of impunity. As the law now stood, it. ap-
peared to him to be much more efficient than under
the proposed change. But it was said, that besides
transportation, there was the alternative of imprison.
ment and hard labour ; but that punishment had
never been found effectual for the prevention of great
crimes: and all the objection to transportation, ap-
plied with additional force to the substitution of im-
prisonment and labour. He was aware that in other
countries the punishment was not so severe. But
the laws and customs of those countries were diffe-
rent from ours; and by a system of Police that
would never be tolerated in this country, many
crimes could be prevented. His present remarks
were confined to the Bill now before the House,
and he should move that the Bill be committed
that day six months. _ _ _

Mr. E. BUXTON had listened with pleasure to
the fair statement of the Hon. Gentleman, and he
was pleased to find there was no insurmountable dif-
ference between the Hon. Gentleman and his Hon.
Friend. He admitted that transportation was no
punishment at all ; but there was another secondary
punishment, and that was the hulks. He would also
maintain that confinement, with hard labour, was an
adequate ptinisLment. The argument of the Hon. Gen-
tleman was, that the Ministers of the Crown had not
done wrong; and, therefore, felons were to he hung.
—He was aware that prevention of crimes was the
only test by which the proposed amendment on the
law could be tried ; but it was wonderful that not
the smallest allusion to that test had been made by
the Hon. Gentleman. The question was, had the
present system been effectual for the prevention of
the crime. On the subject of capital enactments,
not only the utmost liberty, but licentiousness of
legislation, had been permitted. In the year 1818,
107,000 persons had passed through the prisons of
this kingdom ; did that shew anything like a suc-
cessful law? At present there were in London from
eight to 10,000 livenile delinquents, living by theft,
and at a future day doomed to supply the gibbet with
victims. During the last twelve years crime had
multiplied four-fold. All foreigners were struck with
the enormity and frequency of crime in this country.
With a population much greater, and a Police much
more vigilant, the number of crimes was much less
in France than in England. Would not any impar-
tial man ask how long the present system had been
tried? Was property safe, he asked ? Certainly
not. Had crimes multiplied? Certainly yes. Was
that a proof of the excellence of the law ? But it
had been said, that though in some cases, as in that
of larceny, while the punishment had been dimi-
nished, the crime had increased. But in all other
crimes, where no kind of mitigation had taken place,
the same increase had taken place, and that increase
not being confined to larceny, could not be brought
as an argument in the present case; but it had been
said, in the case of larceny, if you diminish the pe-
nalty, you will increase the convictions; that had ac-
tually taken place, and was an argument in favour
of the mitigation of punishment. In the case of
fraudulent bankruptcies under the old law, scarcely
any convictions took place, from the severity of the
punishment. In the case of the convictions for lar-
ceny, he was entitled to deduct from the number all
who would not have been prosecuted, or, if prose-
cuted, would not have been punished, from the seve-
rity of the old law. Two experiments had, at the
same time, been made in criminal legislations. In
the one case the transition had been made from 1
lenity to rigour, in the protection of the Excise, as
to the forgery of stamps. The Solicitor of the
Excise had stated to the Committee, that the system
of lenity had been more effectual than that of rigour,
I and that the number of prosecutiOns had been re-
duced one half. Formerly, ont of twenty-one pro-
secutions, nineteen had been convieted ; and, upon

the present system, out of ten prosieetttral, only three
•had been convicted. Such had been the evidence of
Mr. Cox, who way neite- an enthusiast nor a phi-
lanthropist, but a plain natter-of-fact man. In the
opinion of that Gentleman, the severity of the law
only tended to' protect the fraudulent tradesman.—
He had heard that the Board of Excise had come to
a resolution in favour of abolishing the punishment
of death, except in cases where violence had been
used. In the year 1807, the persons concerned in
bleaching grounds applied for a mitigation of the
law, and succeeded, in their application. In the
County of Lancaster, while all other crimes had in-
creased, in the five years preceding the abolition of
the old law, the number of convictions had been
thirty-eight, and in the five years succe,ling the mi-
tigation of the law, the convictions had been only
nine. A-similar result had taken place in the North
of Ireland. These facts afforded a very clear proof
of the effect of the abolition of capital punishments.
—The cruel enactments in the time of George the
Second had been so far lions accomplishing their
object, that some of the more severe of them had
been abandoned, and then the desired effect had
been produced. He ss ould challenge any man to
shew him a period distinguished for the rarity of
crime and severity of punishments—(!dear, hear).—
Henry VIII. put to death 72,000 persons for robbery,
making an average of six a day, Sundays included ;
' and a lawyer of that day having mentioned to a friend
that he had seen twenty thieves hanged, added, that
while so many had been hanged, he was surprised that
p many thieves still remained. In the time of Eli-
zabeth, a cotemporary author, having mentioned the
number of thefts, said, that the simple country-folks
would rather lose their property than prosecute, from
the severity of punishment. Alfred, who abolished
all capital punishments, except for High Treason,
used to say, 4, that a child with a purse of gold about
its neck, might walk from one end of the realm to
the other." In the State of Pennsylvania, a law, abo-
lishing capital punishment, had been passed for five
years, against the opinion of all the Judges. The ex-
periment succeeded so well, that the law was made
permanent, with the approbation of the same Judges
who had formerly opposed it. In the State of New
York; the horse-dealers applied for a law, making
horse-stealing a capital offence. In a short time they
found it necessary to apply to the Legislature for the
repeal of, the law—(lkar).--Many rested their ap-
probation of the Criminal Law on its antiquity. Such
would be surprised to learn, that the present Penal
Code was a modern innovation on the common law.
king Alfred abolished all capital punishments, as
unfit for Christians ; and the Danes, while they al-
tered all the other laws of Alfred, retained the pau-
city of capital punishments. Even William the Con-
queror, who was described by a monkish chronicler
as loiing the stag as if he had been its Esther, abo-
lished all capital punishment in England. The Hon.
Gentleman proceeded to quote the opinion of Sir E.
Coke, and of Justice Blackstone, as to the modern
date of the present Criminal Code. Within the last
century, 100 capital statutes had been added to the
law, and for every year of that century a capital
enactment had been made, and all of them passed
sub site/din. Mr. Burke was used to mention, that
as he was leaving the House he had been , )pped by
the Serjeant, and upon pleading haste, was told he
could not be long detained, as the business was only
to make a certain offence felony without benefit of
clergy. The late Sir William Meredith, having gone
up stairs to write a letter, was interrupted by an obi
Gentleman reading some papers. Upon asking what
it was, he was told by the Gentleman, that having
had g very great quantity of his turnips stolen, be
had obtained leave to bring in a Bill, making the
stealing of turnips a felony without benefit of clergy.
That was the mode in which the Penal Code had
arisen. The Solons and the Lycurgi of England,
were names obscure and unknown. While the law
was administered with moderation, it would have
the support of the people, but as soon as the punish.
ment exceeded the offence, popular feeling turned in
favour of the criminal. In many cases it was impos-
sible for religious men to prosecute. While the people
were allowed to be most humane, by a singular ano-
maly the laws were most severe. The Learned Gen-
tleman here quoted the opinions of the most expe-
rienced Police Clerks, and that of Mr. Harmer, that
the object of the law was defeated by its severity.—
Many of the witnesses who had been summoned be-
fore the Committee had declared, that but for the
severity of the law in many cases, they certainly
would have prosecuted. That feeling had been par-
ticularly strong in the case of forgery. That had
been the opinion of witnesses taken from all classes
of society, who never could have combined to im-
pose upon the House. It was upon evidence of this
nature that Mr. Dryden, the most forcible and argu-
mentative of our Poets, relied as a principal proof of
the truth of a doctrine the most interesting to man
kind. The lines appeared to him most striking:
-

" Whence Is it, Maya's! that men unskill'd in arts,
In various ages, and of various parts,
Weak, strong, unlearn'd, and wise; or how, or why,
Should all conspire to cheat us. with a lie?"
—lt was to him a matter of great satisfaction that all
these different witnesses had arrived at the same con-
clusion. The most eminent professional men had been
of the same opinion; such as Lord Coke, Lord Ash-
burton, Lord Clarendon, and Blackstone. Under the
present system, he could prove perjuries to an almost
incredible extent, and these arose from a wish to save
the life of the criminal. In suppott of this, the Hun.
Member read a number of extracts from the Sessions
Papers. He knew a case in which a £5O Bank note
had been declared upon the oath of twelve men, tc
be worth 9s.—and, in another case, a Bank note-oi
the same value, had been found to be of the value
of 4s. 10c1. The Magistrates of levensey• tried a
mass capitally for stealing a pair of leather breeches.
They were much shocked ; and one wished to dis-
charge the culprit ; and another wished to insert the
ward Not before the word Guilty ! They went to a
man learned in the law, and at his house was the
Chief Baron of the day ; and he, by way of joke,
said, he saw no way of getting out of the dilemma
but by bringing in the man guilty of manslaughter !
--(Laughter).—They returned in triumph; and if he
was not much misinformed, the records of that an-
cient and sagacious borough sheaved to this day that
'a mail had been found guilty of manslaughter for
stealing a pair of leather breeches !—(A laugh)._
Another equally strange conviction might be found,
that of a man who was tried for returning from trans-

portation (a capital offence), and who was convicted
of petty larceny I —(Lood lauglaer).—The Hon. Gem,
tleman contended that policy as well as hureaeety
dernanded the repeal of calaal punishments; and
asked what would be the effect produced u,.,,11 the
public mind by those pious or humane perjmies._
(Hear, hear)—when twelve men on their oaths con-
victed an accused person, and, in ten minutes after,
sought to defeat the ends of that conviction ?(Dear),
He called on any one, who regarded the inestimable
value of Trial by Jury, to say whether they would
lessen the sanctity of an oath brcontinuing the seve.
rity of the laws so as to make it a duty of humanity
to bring in' verdicts contrary to fact, in order to save
the life of the criminal? The Police of this enotart
was a disgrace to us; and the almost impunity ha
early offences was an inducement to the continterna
in the path of crime. They ought to diminish the
temptations held cut to commit crime. He had vo
sited the ieceptacles for juvenile delinquents, ond lid
blamed Government for having entirely neglected the
reformation of the young offenders. He had visited
eight men before their execution ; and he found be
them that they teem led on front crime to crime, till
at last they. foil-cited their lives to the laws of she
country. There was one passage in Lord Cokis
%yolks, which, consider iog who Lord Coke was, and
considering that he had never been very remarkable
for humanity, would, he thought, have some weight
with the House. His werds we, e these—" Howls.
mentable a sight is it to beheld so many chasten
men and women strangled at that accursed tree, the
gallows. If a man could see, collected together it
a field, all who suffer in a year, the afflicting sight
would make his heart bleed to pity and comps aloe
The inference which he drew from these reflections
WAS this: " The consideration of a preventive Hier
is worthy the attention of Parliament, and blessed he
who may ley the first stone of the work—more bleael
he who shall continue it—and most blessed of all be
who shall complete it to the benefit of his country and
the glory of GOD f'—( Hear )—This had been said by
Lord Coke 200 years ago, but still he was sorry to
say that the first stone of the great work reinained
to be laid. He then restated his objections to the
present system, condemned the penal code as afford-
ing impunity to crime, and holding out the most tre-
mendous inducements to perjury. It was supported
by the names of Mi. Wyndham and Dr. Paley, bat
it was opposed by a long list of practical iaen—aa
experience was against it, and he might add, thatit
was distinctly at variance with the spirit of the Clisis-
tian religion, which teaches, that " we should net
desire the death of a sinner, but rather that he should
turn from his iniquities and live:'—([he lion. Gen-
tleman sal down amid load cheering).
Mr. BRIGHT eulogized the eloquence of the last
speaker; but he was not prepared to say that the
crime of forgery, in the present artificial state of so-
ciety and trade, should be made les: punishabletban
with death. Forgery was not a crime induce. by
poverty and ignorance; it was a crime of edocatiew
and of commerce; and they were called upon to pro-
tect the interests of their neighbours, and the coun-
try at large. He quoted the evidence of Sir A.Mac-
donald (the late Chief Baron), to shew that du:iesre.
quired the strongest possible proof Ireane they uould
convict for forgery. He was not defendlog ti,ewfwie
of our Criminal Law, but he took his stand us the
most important of our commercial crimes. They
must not look at the passions or affections of men,
but ought to consider that they were legislating for
the whole of the community. If they followed the
advice of the Committee, there was no s.pe,ies of
crime for which they must not alter the punishments.
There might be oppres•iee enactments and sangui-
nary punishments ; but he must look at what was
fit for the genius and present situation of the people
of England.
Mr. J. SMITH repeated the evidence he liadgiven
before the Committee, that many bankers had been
deterred from prosecuting for forgery, on account of
the extremity of the punishment. He had known
forgeries committed by the ;ioost ignorant, illiterate,
and artless beings. lie instanced the caseof an Irish-
man, who was reprieved for uttering forged notes.
He visited the man, who told him that he received
ss. each for passing forged notes; but he failed ut-
terly in convincing the man that he had committed
any offence. The thing of all others that would in-
duce him to support the measure was, the fact that
Juries were, in many instances, perjured in the ver-
dicts they returned.
Mr. It. MARTIN said, the opinions of the country
were against this Code of Laws; and he thoughtthat
they should stop short before it came so far as that
Juries would not convict for forgery, on account of
the severity of the punishment. He contended, that
there was a great inaptitude in prosecuting for for-
gery. He himself had raised a man from a state of
indigence to be a Collector of the Revenue. That
man forged on him (Mr. Martin) for two thousand
pounds. He directed him to be indicted for a crime
that would not affect his life; but the indictment was
laid capitally, and he (Mr. Martin) made the man,
who was to have proved the offence, forfeit his re-
cognizance. Thus he had himself aided in compound•
ing a felony!—(hear.)
Dr. LUSHINGTON said, the offence of forging
wills was very rare; for in fourteen years there had
been but three instances, and in all these cases, not
one of the individuals had been prosecuted. Wed
those three cases occurred that very day, in which
one brother forged a will to disinherit his elder boa'
ther ; and he saw a letter, in which the latter said—
" Let me have the property, and I will not prosecute
the offender!" The destruction of wills was as grief'
ous as the forging of them, but there was no punish-
menthad
for it—and yet in fourteen years there had
been exactly three cases of wills being destroyed. It
was therefore clear that the severity of the punish-
ment did not diminish the frequency of the crime.--
He stated the case of a boy, between fifteen and siz•
teen years of age, who passed the 01 Bailey whilea
man was being executed for forgery. He had hitherto
maintained an unblemished character; he was cierk
in a counting-house, on the other side of Blackfriars-
. •
bridge; he went home that day and committed
i,ioniisniltitteed,
and
it Great interest was made to save
it was at last saved, oti a certificate from the Ordi-
nary of Newgate that lie was not in a fit state to re.
ceive the Sacrament. sheered the inadequacy
of capital punishments to prevent crime. A li: the
had been last week committed °lra merchant i
e
been a capital offence. Ile who advocated City, which he would have punished,
~ifeditthl:tAdkinno;