The Statesman.
London, England, 1823-05-22 00:00:00

a:

STATESMAN

mischief there o ground of punishmen*. But it
was not the sole ground—punishment must not only he
just bat exemplary. It should inspire fear, and be as
mach as possible calculated to work through the appre-
hensions as the conduct of individuals. If it excited
other feelings—if it overcame nature and excited horror
by its disproportion of the offence, it ceased to be exem-
plary. The mischief of the act was the growl,' of pu-
nishment, the sympathy of mankind seas the regulator
of its extent ; every attempt to force it beyond the mark
which was pointed at by that great criterion, only re-
volted human feeling and weakened its efficacy as a
source of protection to tlie conitimnity. iVhat but the
enormous disproportion of the vengeance inflicted upon
the followers of paricutac doctrines, could account fur
the well-known inefficacy of cellgioua persecutions?—
why did the failure even become pr iverhi.ll? —the blood
of the Martyrs was the seed of the Unn reit. The feelings
of nature overcame the mune:mired fury of the perse-
entos ; the nunii.liment instead of being snppomed by
synvithy excited horror ; the sufferer I•ecante
the object of admiration and reverence. Opialurarn
jettlicia delet dice, se.l natrcreejudickopido coVirsnat.
But this aas not peculiar to the case of religious perse-
cution. Bow was it that an institiition which may be
tol d in one age was universally reprobated in an
other. The great Sir Thomas More was known to so-
perintenil the literal execution of that bloo iv and bar-
barous punishment for the crime of high Trea-
son; and yeta turg interval did not elapsa before that
sentence was dispensed with, as being tom barbarous to
be carried into execution. lience then it was to be in-
ferred that the efficacy of punishment depended als3 on
the state of feeling in a particular age. Nothing was
morefalse in the theory of legialatioii than the (minion
that there is great deliberation in the comidssion of
crime. The criminal, it would be found, more frequently
did not reason at all, but yielded tt. the force of those
passions, which being eirly indulged in, acquired vigour
as he advanced, which

•• Grew with his growth and strengthened with his strength."
What rendered the law truly efficacious was this, that it
formed a school of instruction en 1 morals, which, by its
reasonableness and its consistency with established no-
tions, gained at once the acquiescence of public opinion
—that it represented the feelings of :01 go ad men in so.
ciete. But a hat sort of morals did they, in their system
of obtains' legislation p-oinnluzay, when they said that
lie who cut down a twig, or dosfroyed a olierry•tree, or
stole a sheep, was as !deck a ceimin II as he who betrayed
his country toe foreign yoke, or spilled the blood of the
twine who gave bi:n birth. Bet no: such a system
could not succeed. Thank Con ! that tainfpiracy of the
Criminal Law against the moral feelings of tuankint!
absolutely failed. Thank GOD! there were feelings of
Deere which no curriirtion, no sophistry could over-
CIIIIC—(Hear.) Bet it was nut to the inefficacy Of the
law Mole that t' ey were to confine the evil cooseiriencess
of its undue rigour. lie lair became contemptible in
its fedora. It nas itself b• came the oluject of that die. I
gnst hirb it faikel to inswro against ineifferent act..
He alive% s conceived that there was a great unders•ate-
went in broiling one's observations as to the repugnance
that was felt to prosecute where tins punishment WWI too
large, to those is ho were imm•distely interested in take
in` justice on the uffeterler. When the prosecutor had
overcome his natural rib:wine:a against the author of
the mischief so far as to forego an appeal to the law, he.
rause of the excessive rigour of its punishment, how
much more strongly meet those sentiments animate the
impartial skidoos ! hoe' much more the remote public,
who read the history of such cases! It should he re-
membered, tl.en, thin the instances of want of prosecu-
tors were bet •the outward and visible signs of that
alienation from the law which pervaded the community.
.11y these marks did the universal spirit indicate itself.
Laws such as there did nut depend un the sanction of
good men. No; good men repudiated them ; they saw
that Gaut just balance which should be maintained be-
tween crime and punishment, in order to render the
latter efficacious, wes destroyeJ in the laws of England,
and that they lessened the general horror for the atrocity
of certain climes. lie losked upon every instance of
the executjon of a &mei:vitt-tiler as a diminution of the
security of humiin life. The punishment of death for
an offence, which, in the public judgment, did not merit
that extreme rigour, abated the influence of that solemn
pnnishment in Cases in which the consent of the whole
of nraukind drelarr,l it to he just. It was said that the
abject of the present system of Criminal law was to de-
ter from the commissii ri of crime by the severity of the
puinishinent held forth; but if such was its object, it seas
the worst calculated to attain it, which the ingenuity
of wan meld devise. if it were framing a system of law
to he laughed at, or for sums purpose the reverse of Uto-
pian. lie wool ask, was this the system of the
ancient law of England ? Was that code tilled with
so many crimes and vet was its result less efficacious,
twits example less influential ? Not tnnre than 4 capital
felonies composed the ani tent Criminal Law of England.
The penal Lies which .ner.v crowded our statute book
were the mushroom growth of modern wanton legisla-
tion. in all the capital punishments which he would
propose to take away. only two were in existence before
the Revolution. Let him not, therefore, be told that the
system was to be defended upon the ground of its anti-
quity. 'This he considered as the reproach of a century,
which he admired for almost every thing else. He did
rot mean to charge Parliament with barbarity, but they
Were guilty of a criminal neglect in not watching the
sacred principle of the inviolability of life. From re-
ports made from the time of the revolution downwards,
it appeared that convictions for capital crimes had
gene OD increasing, and executions diminishing. This
was the necessary concluence of the increase in the
penal laws. If they looked to the codes of antiquity,
they found that the Hebrew law allowed of only one ea,
*tal penishmint for theft, and that was for the horrible
ensue of man-stealing. The Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man then alluded to some tables which he introduced
gut sear as to the number of convictions and executions
in huge. It had been argued that the police account-
ed for the comparatively small numbers in that country.
list he (reentrant within the last nine years, the convic-
tions fur capital offences in England had trebled, while
ham in France had only increased one-fourth ; and dur-
ing that time there bad been no alteration in the state of
•the Pulite. The French ode had now only six capital
pasishinents, and there was only one for theft. The one
was in a tutor berg bay aggravated by so many circum-
stances, that it • ould seem impossible for it ever to or-
est. e Resolutions be was about to propose he should
Sew read. The substance of them was in the know-
Wee of tiovrrnmcn', end abet their intentions were
tree Ma sub e• t be did not know. After a general reso-
Winn. be should propose several other resolutions as
the fretesuatiuri of Bills. The first was to declare the ex-
pediency of takmir assay the punishment of death in err-
taia ream If Ibis were carried, he should then move to
substitute the penislumeet of transportation in such eases.
There would he two o hers, one declaring it expedient
to make a provision that the Ju,:ees shou!d not pronounce
sentence of death where there was nu expectations of its
Wag carried Ulm teeter:um ; and the second, that there
shesll be no confiscation of the property of suicides, and
that na indignity should be utfe, ed to tneir remains. He
sidled to get rid uf the rapital f-lotties • lined in the
Black Art, with the exceeiima of two ; the setting tire
dwelling-400vs, mod maliciously showing. His Re-
SaliVi(nliwould neat ge to 110 away the tier capital crimes
blue by the ,glut rage Act. If, on this subject, he
*Wide be itOttep.it. ml by the Noble Matrimonial Re
Leiser" is the other liaise of Parliament, in that oast,
b. is every othe,, tie shuuld b• happy to follow their
leutsteirs instead ot leading the way, so the object

*hlch he hat at heart could be obtained. lie should also
idler a similar proposition with respect to the capital felo-
nies which the Cowinlttee on the Criminal Laws had re-
commended should be done away. Bills on almost all of
these subjects had passed that House, but had failed in
another place. He had, besides, to propose a general re-
solution on the subject of forgery, to take from that crime
the punishment of death. The propriety of making the
changes which he called for, had been admitted by the
(louse; hot he by no means wished to he understood to
say, that they were precluded from applying such modifi.
elation as they might think proper. 'I here were other of.
fences, hot which he desired to deal with in a simi.
14r manner, and among these were horse, sheep, and cat-
tle stealing, and larcenies in dwelling-houses and on navi-
gable rivers. Tbe executions far the last mentioned of-
fence had in fourteen years been one in sixty-six of those
brought to trial. 'rile lawssit was thought, punished the
Cafith man, who suffered, but produced nu salutary impres-
apart on the other 65. He objected to the character of a
crime being determined by aueount in any case, as there
was not mere depravity in stealing a greater than in
taking. a lesser su n. It was offensive, in his view, to
knee round the property of the rich with severer pun-
ishments than those which visited the depredators who
seized on the humble possessions of the poor. He was
against such a distinction, and if any distinction were
made, he would rather reverse than adhere to the prin.
eiple now acted upon. It was the defective state of the
law in this respect which caused the numerous pious
perjuries which took place at the Old Bailey, a. Jurors
persuaded thents.dees that it was less objectionable to
find a thing of smaller value than it was in reolity, than
to give a verdict which, under the severe enactments of
the law, would go to the destruction of a fellow-creature's
life. He 'hewed the Act of the Ist of George IV. had
made the previous enactments with respect to all ea-
Ines between 40,. and 151. a dead letter ; so that
with respect to these no repeal of the law was twee-
s try. Ile then examined the provisions and preamble of
the Black Act, and contended that no law ever bore
more distinctly on its forehead the stamp of a
temporary measure than that did. Having enumerated the
various statutes which he wished to repeal, he argued that
the repeal of the law for inflicting capital punishment for
horse, sheep. or cattle stealing, was unnecessary. England
had flourished, and her agriculture ha i prospered, before
17411. when the law uow iu force had been framed. If it
could be dispensed with in the two centuries which preced-
ed 1740, he wished to know what had made it necessary
since that period. On offences of this description, he had to
remark, that the executions, compared with the convictions,
were as one to thirty. This he considered an encourage-
' ...rut to crime, from the comparison which it invited, that
the chv ces were thirty to one against punishment. Ile
especially disapproved of enforcing these lows, and that to
!millet arson with more or less severity, as crime chancel
to be more or less prevalent in &particular district. He next
came to the general resoletion which he wished to propose
on the subject of forgery. This crime had been much re-
duced, nay, almost annihilated, by the restoration of the
Currency. The Public owed this benefit to that measure.
The numbers charged with forgery in Mel, amounted to
one hundred and twenty-two; of these seventy-six had
been convicted, and sixteen executed.—Last year, but six-
, ti-three persons had been charged with that crime, of whom
I thirty-six were convicted and only six executed. Here was
a reduction of one•half in the number charged and convict-
ei. and a still greater reduction in the number executed.
Forgery on the Rank he regarded as a crime no longer in
existence, end for private forgitedes, he thought the punish.
meet of death was most unfit. He wished for the adoption
of efficient secondary punishments, and congrstulated the
House ou that which had lately been introduced into our
prisons. With respect to secondary punishment, he
differed from Mr. Roscoe. whose excellent pamphlet on
this subject he had lately read ; and it seemed to
him, that in proportion as he was anxious to diminish
the number of capital felonies, that he was found to
admit the propriety of inflicting serondary punish-
ments. He lamented the little importance which now
attached to the passing sentence of death from the im-
pression that it would not be carried into execution.—
The sentence was so little heeded that the whole form
was regarded as a ridiculous solemnity. A Petiion for
the revision of the criminal code presented to that House
from Maidstone two years ago, had stated 43 to have
received sentence of death in that town, of whom 41
were reprieved before the Judge took his departure. He
condemned the indignities offered to the bodies of sui-
cides and traitors as being in fact no pnnishment but a
mere exhibition of vindictive and brutal folly. He
wished not to touch the confiscation of property in cases
of treason, but lie was anxious that the forfeiture of goods
atonal not follow suicide. That punishment he shewed
fell on the innocent and not on the guilty. The indigni-1
ties offered to the dead bodies of those who had last suf-
fered for treason, were performed by a man in a black
mask, and he (Sir James Alacintosh) bed it from one
who was present, that the multitude who attended ou
that occasion broke out into no exclamations of anger
and disapprubation till the man in the mask held up the
bloody head, of the cnlpsita. This was the first time that
the I sw of England bad been exercised in disguise. He
doubted whether the treatment of a corpse where a ver-
dict of filo de se bad been retioned, was t ted by
any law. It was not mentioned by Sir J. Hawkins, Sir
M. H tie, Lord Coke, Stamford, or Fitzherbert—there
was nothing in its favour with which be was acquainted
but the uncorrohorated testimony of Blarkatone. The
practice, however, it might be contended, though ob-
senre its origin had, from long custom, grown into a law;
but then the question was whether or not that law
ought to continue? If the practice of which he complain.
ed were a punishment at all, it was a punishment not
of the dead Fut the living, and a punishment
indicted on the innocent, and that, too, without trial.—
He objected to this law that verdicts offelo de se had seldom
been given against persons of wealth. It was only in the
cases of the poor and the friendless teat such verdicts had
been returned. Ile blamed not the Juries for this, but he
shewed the poor had not the same means of brining
fora ard witnesses who could speak to the lunacy of the
deceased, and from this he condemned the law as partial
In its operation. The punishments of which lie me.
;stained were repugnant to public feeling and calculated
to produce any effect but that of uniting them in support
of the law. lie knew that some persona thought public
opinion ought not to he regarded, when they were legis-
lating for the nation; but, he contended, it had peculiar
value and importance on a qeestion like this: for, if pub-
lic opinion were not favourable to this indiction of the
punishment awarded by law, either the sentences would
not he carried into execution, or, if executed, they would
only make sympathy for the culprit. He cionld wish to
make the law the representative of the feelings and con•
sciences of the people, so that lie who offended against
them should be placed in a state of moral solitude; and
he desired that the punishments indicted under them
'Mould he of such a character, that none could regtrJ
them as vindictive in their operation, or as originating to
hardeees or near t. Ile moucluited by moving a atriug of
Resolutions, declaring it to be expedient to take away
the ptittoihment of death from cases of larceny is a shoo,
in a dwelling-house, tor on a navigable river : to repeal
certain parts of the atatute of the 9th Geo. 1., called the
Black Act, with the exception of the enactments against
firing a dwelling-house, and maliciously shooting; and,
also to repeal certain other statutes, and to provide for
taking amity the punishment of d-ash for forgery, the
conliscatit'n of goods in Cits.'s of suicide, and the in-
dignities offered to the dead in cases of 'moue and high
treason.
Hr. Secretary PERI, said, the Home was calle I upon
by a single voice to declare that the punishment o:
:nth might not to be
.intlicted in a variety of cases
which it had hitherto been deemed necessary to punish
capitally. To adopt the moti n before the House. wa's
to atbrua all these important propo.itians, each of ;thigh

was sufficiently important to claim their special attention.
He therefore objected to the coarse taken by the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman in thus bringing the subject
forward, Instead of moving for leave to bring in a Bill
in such a case, which would afford an opportunity for
discussion in its different stages. By affirming this Re-
solution, be should pronounce a distinct opinion on se-
veral important questions, while, by consenting to the
introduction of a Bill, he did nothing of the kind. He
called upon the Howse to reflect upon the aukward
situation in which they would stand, if at once agreeing
is these Resolutions, they should subseqnently feel it
their duty to reject the Bills which were to be founded
on them. He therefore objected to the form in which
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had brought this sub-
ject under their consideration, though he was by no means
hostile to the object which ha (Sir J. Macintosh) had
in view. He had last year opposed the giving of a
pledge on the part of the House to take into conshkr-
ation the state of the Crimin %I Laws early in the present
Session. tie had objected to it as pall experience bad
tanght him, th it to give such a pledge was int oevenient.
When given he thought it ought to be punctually redeem.
ed. He admitted that it was expedient to take latoconsi-
, deration the Criminal Code with a view of mitigating its
rigour; and aduf tting this, it was not necessary for
him to debate generally the proposition of the Honour-
, able an I Learned liantline so, who would do him the
justice to admit. that at the very commencement of the
Session, he (Mr. Secr tary Peel) had announced that
he was prepared to state what were the views taken by
his Majesty's Ministers of this question. As, how
ever, the Hon. and Learned Gentlem in had hro right i
forward in former Sessious, he (Mr. Secretary Peel) had
by no means wished to take it out of his hands, though be
had tol4 him he was willing to originate a proposition, but
at the saute time content to wait for the I lots. and L.:tenni
Gentleman to do so, and to give his assent if it met
his ideas. The lion. and Learned Gent. greatly objected
to the mentions being so few in cour,reri.on with the
sentences passed. He (Mr. Secretary Peel) contended
this mist be looked for witere a large discretionary power
was given to the executive, and that such a discretionary
power was desirable, he was prepared to assent. From
16115 to 1820 inclusive, thee, had been 63 convictions for
arson, and only ;It executions. For maliciously shoot-
ing, stabbing, and p lisoning, with intent to kill, the
convictions were 189, the executions &S. For hurglary,
the convictions had exceeded 2,400. the executions were
229 ;and for rape, the convictions were S 9, the executions,
55. In these cases the discretionary power intrusted to
Government had been exercised. Of the necessity which
existed for such power being lodged with them he had
no doubt ; nothing had pressed it more forcibly on his
his mind than the lett-r written by Mr. Burke
in 1780, to Mr. Grey Cooper on the subject of certain
capital punishments then about to take place. The case
to which he alluded was that of the rioters, and in the
letter which he had mentioned, it would be found that
%Ir. Burke had put forth a variety of considerations,
which in his judgment made it the duty of Ministers to
,interfere in casA which could not be provided for a
priori by any law, and to select Irons the parties con-
victed tho,e who most deserved to suffer. Tim Hon. and
Learned Gentleman hail indulged in surmises as to what
a fureigne: must think of oar laws, icons the executions
being so few compared with the sentences pronounced.
A foreigner, and a person, no less eminent than M. Mon-
telquieu ha 1 expressed his sentiments on this subject.
Ile was treating on the distinction to be made between
roisherien, and robberies accompanied by murder or vio-
-1 lenee. 1n China lie stated all robberies to be punished
by death, and the consequence was, most robberies were
accompanied by murder, as the best means of guarding
against convictioo of the robbery. In Aluseovy, he
went on to say, a distinction was taken between rob-
beries committed according to the circumstances which
accompanied theta, and it was found that these robberies
were fretocnt, but murder was not. M. Montesqnieu
remarked it was the same in England, as the rigour of
the law was mitigated by the interposition of the Exe-
cutive, and such ioterposition, which he described as
Lett rea de Grace," that distinguished wrier had main-
tained, was absolutely necessary under a moderate
Monarchy. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman
objected to the law being more or less rigorously
enforced according to the circumstances of particular
districts, but he (Air. Secretary Peel) defended the
principle on which such a course was taken, as
being that which was in fact the foundation of all law. It
We, admitted by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman himself
in the case of sheep-stealing, as he considered that to be an
offence which must be put down with rigour, on account of
the mischief which it occasioned. lie proceeded to inquire
in what way the Penal Code could be best amended. The
Right Honourable Secretary then adverted to the dirt rent
classes of crimes which, a. cording to the statement of the
lion. Gentleman, did not require capital punishment. With
respwa to eight of the number, he was ready to remit capital
punishment. Ile alluded to threatening letters, breaking
down banks of rivers, and maliciously destroying cattle. Ile
admitted that the law with respect to that class required al-
teration. lu the second class of offences, of which there
were no less than 33, several had been provided for. Malls
ciously cutting and destroying cattle was a most aggravated
offence ; but he had no difficulty in saying it was open at
lest to the taking away the capital. Oa the charge of ma-
liciously killing and maiming cattle only two executions had
occurred in the course of sixteen years. Same difficulty
generally arose in prosecutions on that charge, as it was ne-
cessary to prove malice against the owner of the cattle.
The next offence was cutting down or destroying trees. In
six years there had been two conviction., but only one
execution. He was ready to make that offence subject to
transportation for life. That punishment in ordinary cases
would be found sufficient. Cutting down the banks of
rivers, instead of death, might he subject to transportation.
Cutting down the bank of a canal as the law stood was tran-
sportation, and he did not see why cutting down the bank of
a river should be punished with more severity than cutting
the bank of a canal. The offence of destroying the Bed-
ford level, might be under the same alteration as cut-
ting banks of rivers. The next offence was that of sending
threatening letters, which was visited with more ity
then sending letters to extort money. The latter was only
subject to transportation. He beano objection to make
both transportable offences. The punishment of death for
personating out-pensioners of Greenwich Hospital might be
altered. As the fraud was not on the pensioner but on Go-
verement, which might adopt the best mode of prevention,
he should be ready to take off the capital. The same alter-
ation might apply to cutting of serges. Out of a class con-
sisting of 200 cases, he admitted the necessity for remission
of capital punishment in 23 offences. Steeling lialfal stores
he did not wish to have capital. Stealing ou navigable ri-
vers, appeared a Case for capital punishment, The proper.
ty of persons on canals was as much exposed as on rivers,
hut when Ito considered that persons having property of
that description ought to employ active police, he was dis-
posed to give up the capital. Ilk should also remit e tpital
punishment in stealing sheep. la the offence of stealing in
the dwelling house to t3e ant tent of forty shillings lie was
not dittos:red to take away capital puttis::nre”t. It oc-
curred to the Right Honours ale Secretary that the crime
of stealing in the dwelling house, was distingni bed
from others. Judge Blackstone said, " The Law of
England has so much regard for the immunity of a
man's house, that lie stiles it his castle." When be cost-
sidereal the depredations committed by servants on their
employers, it was impoesible to contemplate a crime nits: e
destructive of the interests of societe. In the case of
forgery he was not disposed to make any alteration io
she law. The crime since 18'.'.0 had been la• frequent.
The prosecutions had diminished one-third. Before the
Bank Cash-payinenc-st ail, the convictions for forgery
amonnte.l to une hundred and seventy-nin... In 18.11
the member was only sixty-three, arid. in 1822, the num-
ber of enovictions amounted to six. That c ircittn,t ince
was at least some consulaticia wising from the itch for
pay mat', in mealliz car:tory. With respect to horse-

stealing and cattle Meeting, he could not assent to the
proposition of the Honourable and Learned Gentleman.
He was ready
.to admit the Judges were placed under
come Inconvenience from the necessity of passing rentence
11 on prisoners when that sentence was not to be carried into
execution. It was hisintention to bring in a Bill to afford
a remedy. He postponed all details on Vie subject until
the proper time. Adverting to secondary punishment, he
c insidered imprisonment on board the hulks likely to be
a judicious mode of treating criminals, but as there are
now three thousand onboard those receptscles,lit was not
desirable to increase the number. The tread-mill was a
Proper punithment for offences c.f minor description.—
fhere was, however, Another set on tory punishment
whit h might be adopted. P. eons in cone cases cast fur
death siest he re it to hard lab me and expittiation. The
Crown natght be emnowered to send out such convicts to
be employed on publ c works abroad. In c ,se no co her
Hon. Member introduced a Bill on the c'ihject, hr should
bring in a Bill which he had ready. These were the ex-
periments he was ready to make, bet lie thought
the House eduld not adopt the extensive smile of proceed-
ing propose] by the Hun. and Learned Gentlem tn. The
way to retrace their steps regu!atly, was to move gradu-
ally. Ile oppdsed the motion, therefore should move the
previous question; leaving the Hon. Gentleman to bring
in Bills. He was prepared, to the extent he bad stated, to
give him full and cordial support. •
Mr. F. BUN lON stated, that the Menem of the hone
alone prevented him from answering at length the speech
of his Right Honourable Friend. All be should then
say was, that the speech disappointed him, and that the
concessions it gave were no redemption of the recorded
pledge of that flout With respect to the objection
to the resuimion of capital punishment, on aecnunt of the
frequency of private larcenies in dwelling-houses. the,
very frequency of the offence on which his Hight lion.
Friend rested his objection, was the strongest reason
that could he urged for the mitigation of die capital pu-
nishment (hear, hear, hear!)
Mr. SCARLErf differed from the last speaker as to
the impression which the speech of the Right Poo.
Secretary was calculated to make. He (51r. Scarlet°
congratulated the House on finding that a Minister, fitt-
ing the high office he so worthily filled, not alone con-
ceded the principle, but declared himself prepared to ori-
ginate a series of measures in conformity with that prin-
ciple. It was some consolation and triumph to the
friends of Sir Samuel Romilly to find that what was de-
nied to him in his lifetime, was now about to be carried
into effect, even by those who had so frequently resisted
him (hear, hear!))
• Tue ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed, that those
!sweeping Resolutions of his Hon. and Learned Fri•Et
(Siriames Macintosh) would be ioefficieut to their pro-
posed object. How did lie propose to meet the case of
, larceny in cottages left unprotected in the day time, to
which the existing law affixed a capital runisti Itient
He complainati that his Hon. and Learned Friend had
taken the Noose by surprise in not having stated inv.':
ously the specific nature of his motion eveu to his frieta.
The Home, he thought, wou1•1 require sumo no:icos
before they would consent to a lopt Resolutions, rapt
of them involving laws that would require sep Irate di;-
cessions.

Mr. it. NIARTiN begged leave to snzgest to his Hoe.
and Learned Friend, that if it teas his intention to follow.
up his Resolutions wit'. Bills, it would be injudicious to
risk the fate of those Bills by pressini the Resolutions to
a division. Many persons who would vote against tido
Resolutions might vote for every one of the Bills. It,
however, his Hon and Learned Friend persisted in divi.t-
ing the House, he wodld vote with him.
Sir J. HACI\TOiIi said in reply, that he 1,1)411
trespass bat a few umlaute, to explain the part which hs
should take with respect to the Resolutions. He agreed
with his Hon. and Learned Friend, in rejoicing that the
principles of his late lamented and Learoeit mend (Str
S. Rousilly) had beeo adopted to any extent, but he
would have rejoiced still more if they had been adopted
more extensively, for, with the exception of one Bill,
the whole appeared to him to be a delusion. The con-
duct of his Majesty's Ministers upon this subject r--
minded him of an expression of a Friend of his with
respect to another person, that he was a great friend *to
general principles, but had a particular exception to the
adoption of any one. With respect to the first Resolo-
tion, he would ask how often ba I the House of COMM :Pill
voted for the very measure to which it pointed? Wotild
the Right Hon. Gentleman advise the (louse to Imo s
wit it it had done, to retrace its steps, and forfeit its
pledge to the country? In proposing the Resolutions,
he only wishe I to take the sense of the House in a in,
pular way. The question was precisely the same as if
he had moved for le lee to brin; in a Bill ; at toe atinos',
it only went to add another stage to its progress, and
it was absurd to talk of sash a thing as an irrevocable
stage, the Bill being as liable to be thrown oat in one
stage as In an Aber. He should certainly persist in vitt-
ing the sense of the House upon his first Wisolution, and
would afterwards move the others, if that should helot',
merely for the purpose of having them inserted in the
Journals:—
The House then divided on the first Resolution.
For the motion, 76—Against it, 86—Majority 10.
The remaining resolutions were negatived without a
division.

hl r. R. MARTIN moved for leave to bring in a Bill
to prohibit ball baiting and dog fighting.
Mr. BROUGHAM said, that he was a friend to the .
principle of any measure calculated to pat an end to
animal or human sufferings; but it was an objection to
the present Bill that it did not go far enough. It aimed
at the prevention of sports which formed the amusement
of the lower orders, but did not interfere with those i:t
which the more wealthy and powerful classes indulged.—
He would ask whether fishing, grouse shooting, liars
hunting, fox hunting, horse racing, and other diversions,
of the same kin I, were not to the fall as cruel as 'ha
against which the bill was levelled? Unless the 0..1
was amended so as to include both, be would object tj
.any measure founded on a distinction between the lower
and more powerful classes of his Majesty's subjects. As
be said tbat no attempt was made to interfere with tuts
a:notsetnents of the rich, he would oppose the bill in it 4
first stage, and in every stag., 'f necessary. '
Mr. R. MARLIN Observed, that the argument of the
Honourable and Learned Gentlsman was mast absurd.
It was as much as to say, if five hundred persons were
cast upon a desolate rocit, because he could nut save the-3
all, they should all he drowned.
Mr.811.01.101111i and Mr.M ARTIE mutually explainetl.
Mr. PEEL objected to the H.ll as an unfit subject for Le-
gislation.
Mr. J. smini said, that be would vote for the motion
of hoz lionoureale Friend, so far as it related to dog tig:.t-
lag t of a brutal nature, which was vety much indulg-
ed in.

Mr. W. SMITH declared himself in favour of the Bin,
and denied that such sports had any tendency to keep up toe
manly character of N.e lower classes. They were practised
by the worst deseriptlen of persons, and not by those who
hid any character to reeiommend them, and their ottsious
•consequence was to iutroduZ., cruelty not courage.
Sir. W. RIDLEY thought moth subjects were beneath
legislation. and denied the tethlenky of such sports to ex-
cite to cruelty. He bad himself attended them frequently
i early life, is id did not feel that they bad hardened his feel-
ings.
Mr. BUXTON expressed a hope that his Honourable
Friend would nut be prevailed upon to withdraw his motion.
The same arguments hud been rrge: nrtiust his former 8.D.,
tau erects of which were. found to be so salutary. -Arta the
tendency of-et= sports, he could state the. case of a buy,
wito,frOut attending at doa lights. and mixing with the to-
Clety there, became p rrrrr ten iu character, and lost to eNrry
useful purpose id society. Ne wts less fortunate than :t.e
Hooour.ible Ountlenian fur hie murals were cur-
-1 ,