HC Deb 13 May 1834 vol 23 cc937-40
Mr. Lennard

rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal so much of two Acts of 7th and 8th George 4th, cap. 29, sec. 6; and 9th George 4th, cap. 55, sec. 6,—as was contained in the following words:—"And be it enacted, that if any person shall rob any other person of any chat- tel, money, or valuable security, every such offender being convicted thereof shall suffer death as a felon." So much had been already done in mitigating the penalty of death for some offences, and the general propriety of the principle so fairly established, not only by the dictates of reason and humanity, but by the testimony of actual experience, that his task, in the present instance, was neither a difficult nor a tedious one. His views upon this subject were in accordance with the declaration of Dr. Johnson, that, by putting the punishment of robbery on a rank with that for murder, murder was brought down to the rank of robbery. The consequence was, that in the present state of the law an offender was often urged to the deeper crime of murder to avoid the conviction of the lesser crime of theft; whilst Jurors very frequently were induced to recommend to mercy or entirely acquit prisoners on charges of robbery whom they would have convicted without hesitation had the penalty awarded been less severe. All the evidence, since the partial abolition of the punishment of death for these offences, went to show, that the number of committals had decreased, whilst the number of actual convictions, and, consequently, the practical efficiency of the law, had materially increased. He appealed on this subject to the best evidence—the evidence of experience—and all experience bore him out in saying, that the repeal of capital punishments had led to an increase of convictions and a diminution of crime. Upon this point he begged leave to call the attention of the House to the following returns, showing the number of crimes committed, at two periods, in England and Wales;—

First Period, 1827, 1828, 1829. Second Period, 1830, 1831, 1832.
CRIMES. Convicted. Committed. Proportion convicted in every too. Convicted. Committed. Proportion convicted in every too.
Burglary and House-breaking 1801 2567 70 1956 2632 74
Coining 20 32 62 8 15 53
Forgery 125 213 58 108 180 60
Horse-stealing 429 590 72 411 566 72
Larceny in dwellings 373 531 70 340 483 70
Sheep-stealing 433 689 62 594 848 70
3181 4622 68 3417 4724 72

These numbers, showing an increase of committals of 102, or 2 percent in the latter period, proved that there was a vir- tual decrease, because the whole calendar had increased in the same period 10 per cent, or five times as much as the above. The proportional numbers (in the third and sixth column) showed that the average convictions had increased from sixty-eight to seventy-two in every hundred tried. He had another table which showed that execution did not prevent crime. The hon. Member quoted the following table:—

1st Period, 1827-28-29. 2d Period, 1830-31-32.
CRIMES. Executed. Committed. Executed. Committed.
Burglary and House-breaking 38 2567 18 2632
Coining 6 32 none 15
Forgery 15 213 none 180
Horse-stealing 22 590 none 566
Larceny in dwellings 6 531 3 483
Sheep-stealing 9 689 2 848
96 4622 23 4724

In the first period, twenty-two persons were put to death for horse-stealing; in the second period, none were executed; yet then there were fewer offences of this description, as was proved by these Parliamentary returns. So of some other offences here stated. But there was another point established by investigating these Parliamentary returns. It turned out that all these offences, from which the capital penalty had been removed, had diminished in frequency, judging by the number of committals, except house-breaking and sheep-stealing; and even these offences had increased less than they did in the preceding period, as would be seen from the following particulars:—

1824-25-26. 1827-28-29. 1830-31-32.
CRIMES. Committals. Committals. Increase per Cent. over the former Three Years. Committals. Increase per Cent. over the last Three Years.
Burglary and House-breaking 1860 2567 32 2632 2 only
Sheep-stealing. 511 689 36 848 23

In former times, there were hundreds and hundreds of persons who committed these crimes who had never been prosecuted. There was now hardly an instance to be found where prosecution had not followed the commission of the offence. He thought that these facts were sufficient to warrant him in asking the House to lend their as- sistance in revising the state of the law in reference to the offences to which he had alluded. The hon. Member concluded, by moving for leave to bring in a Bill.

Lord Howick

said, that, as he understood, the hon. Member proposed to repeal the punishment of death only so far as regarded acts of robbery committed without gross violence and ill-usage, it was not his intention to offer any opposition to the Motion. He believed, that the progressive mitigation of the law agreeable to the dictates of humanity, which had, of late years, taken place, was most eminently successful. Perhaps it would have been better to have abstained from further legislation till the reports were before the House upon the whole state of the criminal law; but as a different course had been followed by the House upon the occasion of the Motion of the hon. member for Liverpool, he should offer no objection to the introduction of the Bill.

Leave was given.