The Statesman.
London, England, 1815-07-06 00:00:00

•
THE STATESMAN.

IMPERIAL PARLI4,NRNt .

horrible crime. Neither the law npr the Judge in-
tended that this crime, abominal4as it was, should
he punished with death, and yet ;ebb was frequently
the result. The death too, whiCh such criminals
(sometimes met with was more severe than the punish-
ment of death when inflicted in the ordinary way.—
I lie himself had witnessed an instance of this in 17SO.
A person was pilloried in Southwarli for an mina- •
tural crime, and the criminal by the fall of the Idl- •
iory was killed. Judge Eyre, in a case where one
had by perjury attempted to swear away another
I person's life, had refrained from inflicting the punish- .
ment of the pillory on the very ground that the pu-
nishment might in reality be different from what the 1
1 Court intended. It might be said, however, that it
was too late in the Session to go into the subject, he-
1 cause no other punishinent was propdsed by this Bill
to he substituted in those Came where that of the
! pillory was to be abolished. But be saw no great
inconvenience in abolishing the pirnishinent of the
pillory at present, and leaving the offences in which
it had been usually inflicted to the punishment by
fine and imprisonment, till some additional regula-
-1 lions should be framed in a subsequent Session. Ile
therefore submitted that the 13111 ought to proceed
even in this Session, and moved that it be now com-
-1 witted.
I Lord ELLENBOROUGII felt come pain in ad-
dressing their Lordships on
,this subject, differing as
he did, in some particulars frotii the Noble Earl who
, had just sat down. As for himself, lie certainly had
no particular attachment to this method of punish.
ment, bat for the sake of the public he was bound
openly and plainly to state his opinion to their Lord.
ships. Ile had lived in habits of friendship with the
very worthy person who had introduced this Bill,
and had no doubt it was introduced from the best and
purel motives ; but the Bill was certainly defective.
even in his own view of the subject, for if the pu-
nishment were to be abolished, it would be requisite'
at the same time to substitute some other punishment
in its place. This the Bill hid not done. fie could
not admit, however, that the punishment ought to be
altogether abolished, because there were several of-
' fences to which it was more applicable than any other
that could be found. With respect to the inequality
and uncertainty of which the Noble Earl had spoken,
the objection might be in some degree applied to all
other punishments, unless the officers of the law en-
trusted with the execution did their duty. In the
case of Dr. Shebbesre, which was to be found in
7 Burrow, the Sheriffs had not done their dtity.—
They had held an Umbrella over his head as stated by
the Noble Earl, and lie believed that a servant stood
near, and supplied him with refreshments; add, in-
deed, the Sheriffs had so far betrayed their trust,
that he was nit properly put into the pillory nt all.
But then the Sheriff was afterwards punished by fine
and imprisonment. Daniel Isaac Eaton, who had
before been known as an offender, was pilloried op.
posite to Newgate for a vile and blasphemous attempt
to ridicule the nativity of on! Saviour, of which, as
well as other fundamental doctrines of our religion,
he spoke in a manner lhocliing to every pious and
well disposed mind. The reason, however, for or-
dering him to be pilloried opposite Newgate, was rot
exactly that stated by the Noble Earl. The Court
thought that this was an oicence which would excite

HOUSE OF LORDS, JULY 5.

In the cave' of Kier and others V. Dvke of Athol, judgment
of the Court below reversed.
Tne ruses nP fillin.rlsl),l P. Oldie of Athol (division of cam-
moo ), and Robe. hop v. Graham, remitted for re•c.•nsider-
ation.
In the case of -- v. Lord :Uinta, judgment of the Court
below reves tc.d.

In the cnse of Blake v. Vesey, decree of the Court of Ex-
chequer affirmed.
In Barnet v. Knowles, judgment nflnned.
• The Apothi-caries' Itegvl:ttion Bill. Surgeons Charter Bill,
Newspaper Stamps' B 11, Law Proceedino Stamps' Bill. mat
others, were brought up from tbe Commons, and read a first
time.
The Irish Chnneery Examinations Bill retnraed t and the
Amendments, OD the Matson of Lord ItEDESDALE, ordered
to he taken int.+ consideration to-morrow.
The Local Militia Pay and Chithitni Bill, the Eng and
Irish Militia Pay and Clothiag Bill, the Innkeepers' Allow-
ance Bill, the Agent General of the Farce, Hill, the Spiriis'
Licence Bill, the Navy Bill, and (Salt Deity Bill, were rend
gerund time, and ordered to he committed.

The Wellington Wool Bill, the
Scotch Ave-sed 'faxes' Bill, and other.. were einsmitre.l.
The two Exchequer Bilis Rill., the MA Pasting Biß, the
Irish Mule Servants' Duty Bill, and others, were read a third
time, and pa►sed.
VACCINATION.
Earl STANHOI'E rose to move the second read=
ing of the Vaccination Bill, for the purpose of mov-
ing that the Bill be rejected. The real object of the
Bill was to put half a million or more of the public
money into the pockets of the Doctors of this Cow-
pox Society. This was a very curious Bill, and all
the Bills on this subject had been curious. One Bill
had been brought up from the Commons, recom-
mending that a red flag should he hung out of the
windows of those houses where the small-pox pre-
•ailed, and that was kicked out. Two Bills on the
same subject by a Noble Lord not now in his place,
and these had been kicked out; and that Noble
Lord had wisely given notice that he did not intend
to bring in any more such Bills. This Bill stated,
that there were three kinds of vaccine matter, good,
bad, and spurious, and yet it described no intelligi-
ble means of distinguishing any one of these from
the others. He concluded by moving that the Bill
be read a second time; and this being negatived, he
moved that the Bill be rejected, which was agreed
to. 1

PETITIONS.
Earl GREY presented the Petitions against a Tax
Bill which he had formerly offered, but withdrawn
in order to give time to consider whether there was
any regulation or practice of the House against the
receiving of Petitions against Tax Bills.
The LORD CHANCELLOR stated, that he had
only found instances of two Petitions, the one frons
the Lord Mayor and Council of London, and an.
other from certain Tobacco Traders, respecting a
Bill for the regulation of the Tobacco Trade; one
of these was received, the other was rejected.
Evrl GREY,did not find that there was any pre-
cedent that ought to prevent the reception of such
petitions. In some instances he believed that they
had been received even in the Session when the taxes
complained of in the Petitions passed contrary to the
rules of the other House. He knew of no principle
whatever that ought to prevent their Lordships from
receiving them.
After a few words to the same effect from Earl
STANHOPE, ,the Petitions were laid on the table.

and especially in cases of mixed fraud and perjury.
Cases might arise where persons might attempt to
defend themselves against a conviction for fraud of
which they had been guilty by perjury, or suborna-
tion of perjury. In such a case he himself would
have concurred in the infliction of the punishment of
the pillory, even where he might be disposed not to
• inflict it where the ingredient of perjury, or sub-
ornation of perjury, might be wanting. But the
best mode of proceeding would be to desire the
Judges in another Sessi )n to prepare a Bill on this
subject, pointing out the cases where, according to
their experience, the punishment of the pillory was
proper, and the cases to which, though at present
applicable, it was not suited. This plot had been
pursued with regard to the revenue, leis, where
those which inflicted the punishment of death were
distinguished from those which did not.
The Earl of LIVERPOOL, approved of the pro-
ceeding just suggested by the Noble and I.earned
Lord on the woolsack. The punishment of the pil-
lory was an objectionable one, because it could not
be made exactly that which the law and Judge in-
tended; but then he must consider that it had been
long established, and could not therefore be con's,.
niently abolished altogether, especially in cases of
I perjury and fraud,
Earl STANHOPE stated, that the plan which
had been accomplished at the instance of a Noble
Friend of his (Greniille) was the consolid 'don of
the punishments for breach of the revenue laws into
one Bill. As to the punishment of the pillory, he
detested it on account of its inequality. Suppose,
said his Lordship, the Noble Earl opposite (Liver-
pool) and myself had been found guilty of publish..
ing a libel, for Which offence the punishment of the
pillory has been sometimes indicted ; and suppose
we had been pilloried about the time when the Corn
Billwaspissing, the Noble Earl would have been

confoundedly pelted, and I should not.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE said that it was
great satisfaction to him to see the'calm and dispel..
sionate mode in which the subject had been discussed,
and he was sure the amiable mind of his Learned
Friend (hr. M. A. Taylor) would be highly grati-
fied to find that there was such a disposition to lm.
prove the Criminal Law in this particular at la Mere
period, though it was not thought proper to pass
this Bill in the present Session. It would be in vain
for him, therefore, to press it any further at present.
The Bill was then ordered to be committed this
day two months.
The Report of the Copyhoiders' Bill wal, on the
motion of Lord EGLENBOROUGII, ordered to
be received to-morrow.
Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The Apothecaries Bill, the Consolidated Fund Bill, that Flax
' Bill, (he Cinders Bill, the Inland Coals Biel, pnd the Militia
Pay Bill, were severally read a third time and pissed.
'fhe lteport of the Vote of Credit Bill was received, and tba
Bit! ordered to he read a third time to morrow.
The Report of the American Trade Bill %vas also received,
and the Bill ordered to be recd a third time to-morrow, after a
few words from Mr. A. Browne, Alderman Atkins, 31r. IN it-
berforce, and Mr. Preston.
The tier or( of the Charitable Donation Bit! was received, and
the Bill to be read a third time to-morrow.
ADJOURNMENT.

The CIIANCEELOB, ---
of she EXCHEQUER
PILLORY BILL i popular indignation, and they ordered him to bepil. !
The Earl of LA U DERDALE rose to move the !loried in that place that in case life should be endan- gave notice, that as all the ordinary business would
: committal of the Pillory Punishment Abolition Bill. ! gyred, he might be hurried into Newgate and pro. probably be gone through by to-morrow, he should,
Ile expressed his regret at being under the necessity i tected. It was true, that during his exposure some on that day, move that the House do adjourn till ,
4 •
of proposing this subject for their Lordships' contd. ;of the spectators were said to have applauded ; but Tuesday neat, to allow the usual time for the public:
deration at so late a period of the Session ; but that was it difficult in such a case to surround the pillory ' business in the other House to be dispatched. ' .
was not Isis fault, and far less was it the fault of his' with persons of the same description, in order to ' The Report of the Irish Cotton Bounty Bill was a
Learned and excellent Friend (Mr. M. A. Taylor), alleviate the sense of his disgrace? Even if a person received, and the Bill ordered tube read a third tittle, .1
who had originated this Bill in the other House. lie were so totally degraded as not to feel the disgrace
to-morrow. ,
had postponed it from time to time, in order, if pos. of this exposure in his own person, the example ' The Report on the East India Postage Bill was ..
sible, to have the advantage which, with respect to a would be salutary in its effects on others. Then as brought up, and the Bill ordered to be read • third -
subject of this nature, must result from the attend.. to the punishment being more severe than was in- time to-morrow, after a short conversatinu, in which
ante of the Noble and Learned Lord on the wool-' tended, the Officer was empowered to see to the Alderman Atkins, the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
sack. He was aware that before proposing any ma-i proper execution of the sentence, and arm himself and Gen. Gascoiene participated.
terial alteration in the criminal law of the country,' with the whole force of the posse comilalus for that 1 Mr. WILBERFORCE brought in a Bill to pre.
he ought to have given a great deal of attention to: purpose, if necessary; but it was no good argument , vent the unlawful importation of Slaves into the Bri. ,
the subject: but the criminal law in this particular: against the punishment to say that it was not pro. , fish Colonies. ,
point was so very different from every other part of : party executed ;if not, that was the fault of the I Mr. BARHAM opposed the measure, because be
it, that he had no hesitation in pressing this Bill up. Officer who had the charge of the execution, and such , thought that no sufficient grounds had been laid for
ton their Lordships' attention, even with the limited Officers might, by possibility, betray their trust with the necessity of such a Bill. Before they enactede
examination which it had been in his power on the respect to other punishments as well as this. In the , law to prevent certain evils, they ought at least to
present occasion to apply to the subject matter of the' ease mentioned by the Noble Earl of a person being , ascertain that the evils themselves existed, and from
' question. The punishment of the pillory had been killed by the fall of the pillory, the fault was that of all that had come to his knowledge in coosequence of
condemned by almost all those who had studied and the Officer. This punishment was as old as 1269 on i the late enquiries, he did not believe that any clan..
written upon the philosophy of criminal law, almost our statute book, and had existed before by common Idestine importation of Slaves was carrisd on. He
by all the politicians who had attended to its nature i law. M. Lambard and Fletor spoke of it, and of was, besides, convinced that the Bill of the Hon.
and effects, and even by some of the Judges who had ' the care which was necessary in the Officer to pre- ; Gentleman would he found absolutely nugatory and.
to apply it. No principle in criminal law was bet- vent its exceeding the just measure. The criminal inefficient as to the objects which it professed to cc-
ter established than this, that the punishment ought was to be punished by disgrace and exposure, salris : complish. The Bill was unnecessary. The evils
to be commensurate to the offence. In this respect tames membris el vita. The punishment was not against which it was fftttended to be directed it'd no
the punishment of the pillory was extremely objet. confined to this country. Du Cange spoke of it as ! real existence; and if passed into a law there:- ite it
tiunable. In one of the older statutes, it was put in existing on the Continent, the offender being ex- could only be in the spirit of the advice given by
the alternative, that a man should pay a fine of 20s. posed latlibrio omnium. Considering that the pu- , Ovid to a lover with respect to the affectatiou of at.
or be put in the pillory, so that the same punishment nishment had existed so long, and that no regulation •
1 tention to his mistress ;
was to be inflicted on one who could not pay 20s. as was made for the substitution of another punishment, ! " tit si nullus ere Wale, tamen excute radium."
on one who had attempted to commit an unnatural he could not agree to the passing of this Bill. He While he was on his legs he would observe tliat.it
and abominable crime. Such a state of the law was was adverse, at any rate, to this sweeping abolition, . was his intention in the next Session of Parliament
a disgrace to the age and country in which it existed. though he admitted, that in that instance mentioned to revive the Bill, which, having recently passed
Another remarkable feature in this punishment was by the Noble Earl, where it might be hillicted on a ' through that House, had been rejected elsewhere.—
its gross inequality and uncertainty. The punish- person because he was not able to pay '2os. and ,In adverting to the coarse language of a passionate
meat was not that which was consonant to the nature in some other instances, it might be abolished: , individual which had been used•in another place te-
a the offence, or to the intention of the Court which but in cases of perjury and fraud, and in Some others, ' wards himself as the framer of the Bill, the House,
awarded it, but depended on the humour of the mob, the punishment was particularly suited to the offence, he was sure, would do him the justice to believe that
The case of Dr. Shebbeare was a remarkable one.-- and ought to be preserved. 'fin) subject could not, .he treated it with the contempt vellicii it deserved.—
He had been sentenced to the pillory, but though however, be sufficiently considered this Session, lie He could not however help lamenting the general
this was intended as disgrace, it turned out a sort of himself had never inflicted the punishment when alone apathy which had been manifested on that subject.
triumph. He was put upon, but not in, the pillory ; on the Circuit, except in one instance, where he had, The• Deity a the African Institution appeared to hake
the Sheriff hel his head to shelter (tripod two persons to be put in the pillory, toe hair- . fallen asleep; or peradveuture he was journeying.—
bim from t ; a d i servant stood iiq taken a bribe for assisting in the escape of French; With respect to the Bill now introduced, he repeated
by to atteii upo and hand him refreshments, while prisoners, an offence u bids the Legislature soon : that it was uncalled for, and that the imputations
he was at the same time applauded by the spectators: after made felony, punisha;de by transportation. In : which in its very preamble were thrown on the Co.
so that the punishment, instead of being disgraceful former times, he did not allude to time.; of peculiar.; lollies, were wholly without foundation.
to him, was au insult upon the law. Another case severity, but even since the reign of George I. there 1 Mrs W. SMITH defended the Bill; contending
applicable to the point was that of Daniel Isaac were times when the punishment Iliad been inflicted in ' that the preamble involved no imputation against Cat
Eaton. He had been put in the pillory for a very three cases for one in which it was now inflicted. It Colonies. All that it stated was, that the presa;•t
serious offence, that of endeavouring to throw con- had hiten usual, ton, to send the offonders round the laws were not 'efficient to afford an effectual and cer-
tempt and ridicule on the fundamental principles of Coury. with labels on their foreheads, spnif) jog ' tain remedy for the existing evil. He was persuaded
the Christian religion; and as an example to the their offence, and then to.pillory them two or three that if the lien. Gentleman deliberately considered
prisoners, he presumed, he was pilloried opposite to times. The practice was milder at pres'i 7, front an the subject he would approve of a Bill, the object of
Newgate jail;. but the crowd,, probably from some attention to some peculiarities in the times which . which was to accomplish that which in the present
mistake as to the nature of his offence, applauded Judges applied in the exercise of a sound discretion. state of society in the West Indies, could not be ex.
him. In this case ton, the punishment was far more He moved that tl.,e Bill be read a second time this day pected williont further Legislative interference.
lenient than the Judges intended. In other cases it two months.
I Air. A. BROWNE warmly vindieated the West
was more severe: for instance, when the punishment The LORD CHANCELLOR was of opinion thst India Body from the aspersions of his Houourabla
of the pillory was inflicted for offences which had a there were offences with respect to which it would Friend (Mr. Barham); and insisted that the impos.
tendency to exasperate the feelings of the populace, be unwise to abolish the punishment of the pillory ; sibi!ity of proceeding in any enquiry at this advanced
Sea as the attempting to commit an unnatural end fet instance, cases of perjury and fraud, or cheating, period of the Session, was their only motive for Dot