Lord Broug- hamwished to call the attention of their Lordships, and more particularly that of his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack, to another, and in his opinion, very important subject—he meant the state of our penal statutes. It was a fact well known to very many of their Lordships, that there existed on cur statute-book many penal statutes, which contained very high and severe penalties attaching to the commission of certain acts, or the omission of certain forms, and instead of these being allowed to remain a dead letter, or erased, they were sometimes made a handle for the infliction of great oppression. The case of the bill which their Lordships had passed yesterday, was an illustration of the kind of penal statute to which he had referred. There were on our statute-book certain high penalties to be inflicted on Members of either House of Parliament, for taking their seats and voting, without taking the oaths, and subscribing the Parliamentary roll, but those were so extremely severe—so far out of all proportion to the acts or omissions to which they were attached, that no one ever dreamed that they ought to be inflicted. If the penalty were a fine of 40l. or 50l., or 100l., it would be considered quite enough, and it would be at once paid, without for a moment rendering a bill of indemnity necessary; but what were the penalties as they now existed on the statute-book, applying to the case he had referred to? They amounted to a total and perpetual disqualification for holding any situation of trust or honour or profit; they incapacitated the unfortunate offender, however much his act might have been an error of which he was unconscious at the time, for ever having a seat in either House of Parliament; they incapacitated him from the power of suing, or of entering any plea in any court of law or equity, or from taking any legacy or any gift or profit by any legal document. In fact, this was total civil incapacitation, and almost equivalent to civil death, and the consequence was, that no one thought that the penalty ought to be enforced; and as it ought not to be enforced, it ought not to be allowed to remain on the statute-book. There were other penal statutes which, though not so severe in the penalties they enacted, were nevertheless extremely annoying and harassing, and might be made a means of gratifying private rancour or animosity. He alluded to those statutes intended to 495 enforce attendance of persons at their parish churches on Sundays: by one statute the fine was 1s. for each omission to go to church on Sunday; but by another statute, the fine was raised to 20l., if the party omitted to attend his parish church for four successive Sundays. These, he repeated, were in themselves most annoying, not so much from the amount of the fines they inflicted, though in the second case to which he had referred, the fine would be ruinous to many, but from the harassing and abuses to which they might give rise. It was not, he believed, more than a month back from the time he was speaking, when eleven persons were convicted in 1s. penalties for non-attendance at church on Sundays. The fines, it was true, were not much, but there were, besides, the costs where the parties refused to pay. In one case the costs were 14s., and in another 23s., and for non-payment one party was sentenced to be imprisoned sixty-three, and the other sixty-one days. Now, he supposed their Lordships would agree with him in thinking, that any person who was anxious to see the parish churches duly attended on Sundays, could not well hit upon a mode worse calculated to insure that object than those coercing fines. Indeed, it was about the best mode of insuring church non-attendance that could be devised; besides, as he had said, this power was liable to be perverted to most capricious purposes. He cast no blame on any body; but surely our statutes ought not to be left in a state in which to enforce them would be disgraceful. He had heard blame cast for having many of these fines received on account of the Sovereign, or of the State, but there was no option, when once the statute was enforced. He repeated, that he mentioned these circumstances for the purpose of having the attention of Government, and particularly of his noble and learned Friend on the woolsack, directed to the subject. The law ought to be altered on these matters, or perhaps, what would be better, there ought not to be any law at all on many of them.
§ Subject at an end.