HC Deb 25 May 1821 vol 5 cc999-1001

The report of the committee on this bill having been brought up,

Sir J. Mackintosh

said, that he intended to move three amendments, which he did not think would excite discussion. The House had declared its opinion, that the severe punishment in cases of forgery ought to be reduced. In the majority on that question were to be found eminent and enlightened merchants and bankers; amongst whom were his hon. friends the members for Taunton and Wendover. In framing the bill originally, he, in deference to the judgments of others, had made some considerable sacrifice of his own opinions. In compliance with the wishes of a considerable portion of the majority of the other night, he was now about to propose some important exceptions. The first exception related to the forging of wills. The next exception related to two species of forgery under the Marriage act; the first relating to the forgery of marriage entries, and the second to the forgery of licences. He concluded by moving the amendments.

Mr. Cripps

said, that as the Bank of England was excepted so, in fairness, ought there to be an exception for the protection of country banks.

Sir J. Mackintosh

said, it would be open to any member to propose further exceptions On the third reading.

Mr. Grenfell

saw no reason for excepting the Bank of England; but if there was any reason, it applied as strongly to country banks.

Mr. J. Martin

said, he must oppose the bill in a future stage, unless the punishment for forgery, in all cases, was transportation for life.

Mr. Bennet

said, that transportation, so far from being considered a punishment, was really a bounty upon crime.

Mr. Baring

could see no ground for excepting forgeries on the Bank of England. It was well known that the Bank did not pay their forged notes. The question of their exception was not, therefore, a question between the Bank and the public, but a question as to the very principle upon which the bill rested. This principle was, that mild but certain punishments were better calculated than severe punishments to prevent the commission of crime. Indeed, if that principle were not true, the present bill was good for nothing. The doubts which he felt regarding this bill related to the secondary punishment which it was its object to provide. His hon. friend had said, that transportation was the only secondary punishment which could be inflicted; if that were the case, he should feel himself compelled to vote against the bill, as he was of opinion that transportation even for life was not a punishment at all calculated to prevent a crime to which there were so many temptations as forgery.

Mr. J. Smith

objected to the judges being allowed a discretion in affixing the punishment for forgery. The punishment should be certain. He thought punishment by hard labour would prove the most effectual means of preventing forgery.

The amendments were agreed to.

Sir J. Mackintosh

also moved as an amendment, that the term of transportation for cases of forgery should be for a period not less than three and not exceeding fourteen years.

Mr. Baring

said, he should be sorry to see the bill pass with this discretionary clause of imprisonment for three years. He should wish the crime of forgery to be punished by the peremptory infliction of fourteen years imprisonment and hard labour. If any case should occur in which that punishment might appear too severe* it would be in the power of the Crown to extend its mercy to the offender;

Dr. Lushington

was of opinion that the punishment for forgery ought never to be less than confinement to hard labour for ten years. He thought that no part of the punishment attached to it ought to be left to the discretion of the judge.

Sir J. Mackintosh

withdrew his amendment, and moved that the words "imprisoned for the term of ten years, to be kept to hard labour," be inserted; which was agreed to; as was also an amendment for excepting Scotland from the operation of the bill.

The bill, as amended, was ordered to be printed.