PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY. CHAP. IV.-Committee of Secrecy-Prisons in London-Bank Forgeries-Benefit of Clergy-Indemnity Bill-Blood Money System-Army Estimates, &c.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Feb. 27. Lord Holland presented a petition from the Common Hall of London against granting an indemnity to Ministers; and several petitions to the same effect were presented from persons confined under charges of high treason, and discharged without trial.

The Duke of Montrose, in moving for the second reading of the Indemnity Bill, justified the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, and the manner in which Ministers and Magistrates had exercised the powers conferred upon them, which had prevented the lives of thousands from being

sacrificed.

wise, that, up to a certain time, expectations were formed of bringing a large proportion of the prisoners to trial, but that these expectations were unavoidably relinquished. In conclusion, the Committee were of opinion that the Government had exercised the powers vested in it, by the two Acts of last Session, with due discretion and moderatiFeb. 23. The Duke of Montrose pre-on, and also that the Magistrates in the sented the Report of the Committee of several disturbed districts, by their activity Secrecy, which was read by the Clerk. It and vigliance, materially contributed to contained a long Account of the rising in preserve the public peace. The Report was Derbyshire in the month of June, the trials laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. and convictions at Derby in October, the disturbances at Nottingham and Huddersfield, and the trials at York, at which, it stated, the Huddersfield rioters had been acquitted, because sufficient evidence could not be produced to procure convictions. all the disturbed districts it is asserted that great and uniform reliance existed of powerful support and co-operation from London, however erroneous such an expectation may have been with respect to the supposed extent. The Committee, with great satisfaction, give it as their decided opinion, that not only merely in the country generally, but in the disturbed districts themselves, the great body of the people remained untainted even during the time of the greatest difficulty and distress. They then state that some of the disaffected, par; ticularly in London, are still active, and determined to persevere, though with diminished numbers; and that, therefore, continued vigilance will be necessary, both on the part of the Magistrates in the most disturbed districts, and of the Government. With regard to the mode in which Ministers exercised the extraordinary powers vested in them, the report says-"Warrants were issued against ten, who have never been taken. Forty-four were arrested on suspicion of high treason who have not been brought to trial: of these seven were discharged after examination, without any subsequent warrant of detention; thirtyseven were detained; but one who was finally committed was soon afterwards discharged; another was soon discharged on account of illness; and a third died in prison. The Committee, after several examining the grounds of these warrants, think that the arrests and detentions were fully justified; and they find, that in no case was any warrant of detention issued except in consequence of information upon oath. The Committee also found that all the persons so arrested and detained, and who were not tried, were discharged from time to time, as the state of the country, aud the circumstances of the different cases, were thought to permit. The Committee understood, like

The Marquis of Lansdowne contended and that the disturbances in the country that the suspension had been unnecessary, had been chiefly occasioned by Oliver and his associates. There was no precedent for such a Bill of Indemnity, which affected the interests of those not known as well as of those known, but that of 1801 in this country, and of 1798 in Ireland,

The Earl of Liverpool contended that there had been a systematic and general plan of insurrection, and that the effect of suspending the Habeas Corpus had been to suppress it without bloodshed, and thus to protect both the Government and the people. The disturbances had existed for weeks and months before Oliver was heard of.

The Lord Chancellor justified the conduct of Ministers, and reprobated the mode in which the Secret Committee had been spoken of.

Lord Holland condemned the measure as a bill to indemnify Oliver the spy, who had hunted his fellow-countrymen into the toil.

Viscount Sidmouth said, that the person alluded to had done nothing that required an act of indemnity. All the information he had received from that person he (Lord S.) had laid before the Secret Committees, and he wished he could reveal what be had heard from him since. No man had been arrested whom he would not again

have taken into custody upon such informa- | time, then, when it was to he deliberated

tion as he had received.

The Earl of Carnarvon thought this House should inquire whether Ministers had done their duty before they closed the door of public justice against those individuals who had complained of oppression. The amendment was negatived by 100 to 33: and the bill was read a second time.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

whether the restriction should be longer continued, it was a question of great, of the very greatest importance, to ascertain at what expence of human blood the system was supported. He therefore moved that there be laid on the table an account of the number of prosecutions for forgeries on the Bank of England, from the 1st of January 1816, to the 15th of February 1818, distinguishing the numbers convicted or Feb. 23. Mr. Sheriff Desanges presented executed, or otherwise punished; also an the City petition against the Indemnity Bill. account of the numbers prosecuted during A petition from the Trustees of the British, the 14 years preceding the restrictions on Museum, praying for the means of purchas- the Bank; and the numbers prosecuted ing the library of the late Dr. Burney, was since that period to the 25th of Feb. 1818, referred to a select committee. distinguishing the convictions and punishA Report was received from the Commitments, capital or otherwise. There was a tee of income and Expenditure. In answer to a question from Sir C. Monck, Mr. Vansittart said, that in the income, including the Sinking Fund, there was a surplus of 3,000,0001.

nother part of the subject, too, on which information was necessary. It might be supposed that, according to the increase of forgeries ou the Bank, there was an abatement of forgeries on the com of the realm.

Petitions were presented from Notting-In order, therefore, to as ertain the real ham. Warwick, and other places, for Parliamentary Reform, and against a Bill of Indemnity.

increase or abatement of crime, he moved for the numbers committed for coining or altering the current coin, gold or silver, during the 14 years preceding the restriction, and during the period since then to the 25th of Feb. 1818, distinguishing the convictions and punishments.

After some observations by Mr. Grenfell, Mr. Lockhart, and Mr. Wharton, the different motions were agreed to.

Feb 24. Mr. H. Summer addressed the House on the subject of the application by the Corporation of London for a grant of $4,000l. to complete the Whitecross-street prison. He thought they should first give an account of the way, in which the previous grant of 93,000l. had been expended, and also produce an account of the revenue and expenditure of the Corporation. It would be found that they had wasted much of their money in presents of swords, snuffboxes, gold boxes with the freedom of the city, entertainments, &c. He concluded with moving that there be laid before the House a statement or account of the revenues of the City of London for five years past, up to the S1st of December 1817, including therein an account of all monies received for rents and quit rents, for granting the freedom, casual receipts, sheriff's' fines, fines for leases, interest of Government securities, and, generally, all other monies receiv-persons were charged with capital offences. ed at the treasury of the City of London.

Sir W. Curtis defended the Corporation, and moved an amendment; but, after a discussion of some length, the original motion was carried by 26 to 13.

Sir J. Mackintosh addressed the House on the subject of forgeries on the Bank of England. He said that for 14 years preceding 1797 there were only four convictions for forgery on the Bank of England; from that period to 1811 there were 418; so that the number was more than centupled, by the suspension of cash-payments, and the profuse issue of Bank-notes. At this

Feb. 25. Sir S. Romilly rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill to remove from the Acts of the 10th and 11th of William III. such parts as took away the benefit of Clergy from persons indicted and tried for stealing in dwelling-houses. The returns from 1805 to 1816 inclusive, making 10 years, showed that under these Acts 655 persons had been indicted; of these only 113 had been capitally convicted, but not one had been executed. Of simple larceny, 365 had been found guilty. This was a strange circumstance in the administration of the Laws, when such numbers of

A high authority, Mr. Justice Blackstone, had made particular remarks on the effects of the practice of Juries returning verdicts founded on the value of the sum at the time of passing the law, compared with its present value. There was another Bill of his (Sir S. Romilly's) to which he might altudehe meant that as to capital offences for stealing in houses, &c. to the amount of 40s. In 10 years, up to 1816, 1997 persons had been tried on the Act; of these 293 had been capitally convicted, but not oue of them had been executed in 1816, 131 were tried, of whom 49 were convicted,

The petition was supported by Mr. Alderman Atkins; and Mr. Lushington said the subject of the petition had already attracted the attention of Government.

Mr. G. Banks brought in a bill for the more effectually preventing the destruction of Game, which was read the first time, and ordered to be read a second time on the 10th of April.

Mr. B. Bathurst brought up the Report of the Secret Committee, which was read. It went over the same grounds, and came to the same conclusions in every respect with that presented from the Secret Committee of the Upper House. Mr. Bathurst, moved that the Report do lie on the table.

and only one executed. Altogether, of 1200 | from the Common Council against Mock persons indicted, one only had in that time Auctions. suffered by the law. Under such circumstances, however, crimes actually multiplied, and the sentence of the law was not carried into force. Those who were acquainted with the Bankrupt Laws must know well what a number of fraudulent cases occurred every year, during the last 40 years. Yet during a period of 85 years he found only four convictions carried into effect. The offences of forgery had also obviously greatly multiplied--perhaps by the long existence of so much paper currency, not merely of the Bank of England, but of other bodies, and the general augmentation of the number of paper securities. This might have rendered it nearly impossible to proceed on the former system. Pardons were found necessary; but he believed few were granted, except under circumstances of particular qualification and mitigation. He believed that the sense and feeling of the people of England were against the punishment of death for forgery. On that very day two young lads were to have been executed for forgery; and had it not been for proper communications having been made, their fate would that morning have been irrevocably sealed. It was clear that the severity of the punishments had not prevented the crimes. There was great danger to the moral feelings of the people in letting them see that there was a light regard paid to lives. Sir S. then reprobated the exhibition of the body of Hatch previous to interment, and concluded with moving for leave to bring in his bill, which, after a few observations from Mr. J. Smith and Sir J. Newport, was agreed to.

A conversation then occurred as to the pardon of Brock, Pelham, and Power, convicted of inveigling the poor Irishmen.

Mr. B. Bathurst and the Attorney-Gene neral stated, that they had been pardoned in consequence of the opinion of the Judges that the existing Laws did not reach the case. The framing of a new Law on the subject was in contemplation.

The Coroners' Bill was, on a division, ordered to be read a second time this day six months, by which it is lost for the present Session.

Feb. 29. Mr. Alderman Wood presented a petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Livery, in Common Hall assembled, of the City of London, against the Indemnity Bill.

On the petition being read, Sir W. Curtis, said, "I can only say that I was present at this meeting, and I entirely disapprove of every word in the petition."

The Sheriff's than presented a petition

Mr. Tierney wished to know whether the Committee had, as they were impowered to do, sent for persons, papers, and records. The Report was a jumble of nonsense, a hash made out of the Derby trials and the old reports, in order to white-wash Ministers. It was the precursor to a Bill of Indemnity, with regard to which there had been no inquiry, though the table was covered with petitions.

Lord Castlereagh conceived the House and country would entertain a different opinion with regard to the Report, and the events to which it related. He was convinced that the House would see the danger had been greater. Ministers were always ready to meet danger with vigour; and when that danger subsided, to recur to the ordinary course of law for preserving the peace of the Empire.

After some further conversation, in which Mr. Brougham, Lord Folkestone, Sir W. Burroughs, and Lord Castlereagh, took part, the Report was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.

March, 2. Mr. Bennett expatiated upon he evils arising from the blood-system of rewarding Police officers, and adverted to the recent cases of conspiracy against men's lives to obtain such rewards, and also to similar cases in 1772 and 1786. He moved for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal this system, with certain exceptions. He did not mean to abolish Tyburn-tickets, but he did not approve of the sale of them. He did not wish to take away the 301. given to the executors of persons killed in the pursuit or apprehensions of highwaymen or other offenders. He mentioned certain Acts, part of which it was his object to do away. He was desirous of a clause to authorise Courts of Justice to assign payments of money for the expences of witnesses, &c. in cases of felony, &c. He wished to alter the present practice, by giving the Courts a

better power of apportioning money for expences. Leave was given to bring in the Bill.

Mr. C. Wynn moved the third reading of the Election Laws Amendment Bill.

Mr. Allan objected to the Bill, and moved that it be read a third time this day three months, which Amendment was, after a long discussion, carried, on a division, by 51 to 44. The Bill is consequently lost for this Session.

Sir S. Romilly brought in a Bill to repeal certain parts of the 10th and 11th William III. relative to stealing in dwelling-houses. The Bill was read the first time.

and the resolution was agreed to. Resolutions were also passed for the grants of pay, &c.

Mr. Vansittart then moved for 2,000,000l. to discharge interest on Exchequer Bills, Irish Treasury Bills, and Mint notes, 1,095,6157. to pay off outstanding Irish Treasury Bills, and 560,000l. to be put at the disposal of the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, being the 100th part of the 56,000,000l. of Exchequer Bills issued last year.

In reply to Mr. Warre, Mr. Vansittart said, that it might not be necessary to call on the House for any sum for the erection of fortresses in the Netherlands, as we had counter-claims on that Government, which would reduce its demands. In reply to Mr. Shaw, he said no part of the contributions from France would be applied to the service of the country this year; the Government of France would pay the expence of the army of occupation, and the remainder of the money would he applied towards the charges of erecting the fortresses in the Netherlands. The different resolutions were then agreed to, and the House was resumed.

Mr. Vansittart, after a conversation," in which Mr. F. Lewis, Mr. Grenfell, aud others, took part, obtained leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Act for calling in Bank tokens. In the Bill which was in preparation, a provision was made for parties to pay or receive Bank tokens for twelve months after the 25th of March, in postage

The House having gone into a Committee of Supply, Lord Palmerston rose to submit the Army Estimates. The Finance Committee, he said, had given such details upon this subject, in their recent Report, that little more remained for him than to recapitulate them. The expences of the Army were more last year than the present by 188,0271. 19s. 3d.; but if they compared the amount of the whole charges with last year's, including all the establishments, it would be seen that the total was less by 418,400l. Upon a view of the numbers of men, there would be found a diminution of 995 men in the troops of England and the colonies. In Ireland there had been, last year, 22,000 men. This year the amount was 20,000. It was impossible, entirely, to equalize the numbers, but he stated the reductions, such as they were, upon a general calculation. The army in France had been reduced in total 13,344; and if a general view should be taken of the whole numbers, including reductions in India, there would be a diminution of 21,640 men, or in round numbers 22,000 men The Noble Lord, after going into a variety of minute items, concluded with moving his first resolution, which was, that 113,640 be the number of men for the military services of Great Britain, Ireland, &c. for the present year. Mr. Calcraft gave notice, that in the Re-teresting considerations, I will attempt to port he should move for a reduction of 8 or 9000 men, as he could not think it was ne cessary to keep up 25,000 men in Great Britain, and 20,000 in Ireland.

Sir M. W. Ridley objected to several of the items, and particularly to one for keeping in order a botanical garden at St. Vincent's. Lord Palmerston said, the garden had been established under Sir George Young, and had been since under the direction of the Military Board, though it certainly did not, at first sight, look like a proper item for the Army Estimates. He should certainly enquire into the matter, and discontinue the charge, if it appeared to be useless.

A long and general conversation ensued,

or taxes.

Inadequacy of the Laws against Forgery.
TO THE EDITOR.

SIR,

In a recent number of your journal were some judicious remarks on Forgery: aud as the public attention is at present much occupied by this subject, and the question involves some important and in

prosecute what your former correspondent so well commenced. That forgery is a crime of a venial nature it is not my wish to maintain; but that it is of a character to justify the severity of its punishment, I must strenuously deny. In scarcely any offence, except in the awful crime of murder, is the law so inexorable, as in the case of forgery; and is it equitable and just that to defrand, or to attempt to defraud, an individual of a few pounds, should be put on a par with depriving him of exist

ence?

From the extent to which the commerce of the country has attained, and the consequently greater facilities that exist for

the success of forgery, it became necessary to enact laws, if not to prevent, at least to check so serious an evil. For this purpose, the penalty of death was inflicted; but, says an intelligent journalist, it has not had this effect, and ought, therefore, to be done away with. This argument is, however, inconclusive; for, although the crime has certainly increased under present circumstances, it is impossible to say in how much greater ratio itmight have augmented under a less severe system.

urged against the treatment of those guilty of forgery, might, with equal justice, be extended to other descriptions of criminals. How many have atoned by their deaths for sheep and horse-stealing? The reply of one convicted of the latter offence is well known; when asked by the judge what he had to say, why the sentence of the law should not be passed on him, he said, that he thought it hard he should be hanged for only stealing a horse. “You are not hanged, rejoined the judge, for only stealing a borse; but in order that horses may not be stolen." Dr. Franklin remarks, that the man's plea was reasonable and just, whilst the reply of the judge was inequitable and brutal. Of Dr. F's authority, however, it is no small reduction, that these were his sentiments after he had, from having been the admirer and eulogist of this country, become its determined enemy, and was nothing loth on all occasions, to villify the government, and depreciate its institution-but fas est ab hoste doceri.

It being admitted on all sides, that pnnishment is not inflicted from a vindictive motive, but to prevent the recurrence of crime, it next becomes a question whether some other mode might not be adopted equally conducive to this object, and more consistent with the dictates of humanity. This is the grand fulcrum on which the merits of the question rest; but as expe- | rience is better than theory, and facts than conjecture, we shall adduce the practical results of different principle. The great Frederick, of Prussia, whom no one will The objection that exists against substisuppose to have been influenced by very tuting the more lenient punishment of extender feelings, was too shrewd a politi-ile to a foreign clime, of confinement and cian to destroy, where there was a hope of reform. Hence he seldom resorted to executions; but eondemning offenders to work for certain periods on his fortifications, still rendered them useful subjects.

hard labour, for the awful penalty of death, is, that a diminished dread of the consequences would produce a greater frequency of crime. But this is not the case; for we find, that a sentence less cruel does not weigh with less force on the minds of the bad; hence the premises being incorrect, the inference falls to the ground; and bere again we fortunately are able to rest our argument on the solid basis of a fact. In the jail of Philadelphia, which is deservedly held up by a celebrated critic as a model for all similar institutions, a rational but severe discipline is imposed on offenders, and such have been its salutary effects, that veterans in vice are said to have declared, that they would prefer death to the undergoing it a second time. Thus it being proved that so indiscriminate a recourse to the punishment of death, is opposed to the mild genius of Christianity, repulsive to humanity, ahd inconsistent with sound policy, it is a law that cannot be justified, and ought consequent

The Spaniards and Portuguese supplied their unhealthy stations in Africa and America by criminals, instead of sending valuable soldiers to perish on the pestiferous shores of Guinea and Senegal, as has been the custom of our Executive govern. mentsi The loss, just claimed by the Dutch in the early years of their occupation of Batavia, was in a great measure replaced by criminals, and by vagabonds of their own, and of other countries. But it is to be regretted that they did not dis play equal sagacity in preventing, as in remedying this immense waste of human life: for desirous of making that country like the one they hal left, they most inju diciously set about forming canals, which in that tropical climate were the source of the deleterious exhalations so destructive to life, and tending so often to depopulately to be disannulled, that, in many respects, beautiful country. If then nations that we are in the habit of considering so far behind as should in this instance have a decided advantage; is it right that, with these facts before it, our legislature should still sanction an indiscriminate execution for forgeries, &c.

It will be perceived that the present remarks are the application of a general Principle to a particular case; and what is

August 15, 1818.

POLITICAL PERISCOPE.

Panorama Office, Aug. 29, 1818. An Irish correspondent, who dates from Kilkenny, has "just taken the liberty to inform us, that besides the three ways of getting into parliament, mentioned in our last, there is a much better practised in his