Sir Francis Burdettpresented a Petition from Julian Hibbert, praying the House to address his Majesty to grant his gracious pardon to Robert Taylor, now imprisoned for having preached a sermon in his own chapel, explanatory of that allegorical interpretation of the Scriptures, which he believed to be the truth.
Mr. Denison,as one of the visiting Magistrates of the prison, felt obliged to the hon. Baronet, for giving him an opportunity of removing the charge of cruelty to Mr. Taylor, which had been brought against the Magistrates by that gentleman in whose favour this petition was presented. Mr. Taylor having been found by a Jury guilty of a misdemeanour, was sentenced to imprisonment in Horsemonger-lane gaol. With permission of the House he would state what requests Mr. Taylor had made since his conviction. They were three in number. First, that he might be excused from attending Divine Worship in the chapel where the other prisoners attended: secondly, that he might be allowed, without any inspection, an unlimited correspondence; and thirdly, that he might have better diet than that which the other prisoners had. There were certain regulations in the gaol, which the House would agree with him (Mr. Denison), ought not to be departed from, and, consequently, so far as these requests interfered with that arrangement, the visiting Magistrates were justified in refusing them. Mr. Taylor had thought fit to complain of the apartment in which he was confined, but no good ground for that complaint existed, inasmuch as it was one in which there was a free current of air; it had a fireplace and glazed windows, and its dimensions were eighteen feet by twenty-four. There was a corridor which led to it, in which he might take walking exercise. With respect to the complaint made against the food which was given him, there was no more cause for the complaint than as to the apartment. He wished every poor man in the kingdom had as good food and as much of it. Mr. Taylor had, in common with other prisoners, roast beef, pork, peas, and potatoes; and as much as in moderation was sufficient. He might have small beer or ale to his 197 dinner; but neither spirits nor wine was allowed by the regulations which prevailed in the prison. The room in which he was confined was comfortably furnished, having in it a sofa-bed, chairs, and a chest of drawers. He had also fire and candles allowed. He was permitted to see his friends four hours a day, from eleven to three o'clock; but there was a screen between them, which kept them about three feet apart. This screen had been placed there a long time, for the sake of security, to prevent too close a communication with the prisoners and the friends who visited them. And as to the correspondence, there was, of course, obliged to be some limit put to that. Mr. Taylor had permission to read books of philosophy, historical writings, travels, classics, poetry, or any books of belles-letters, with newspapers, if he chose to have them; but he was not allowed to have some of the publications which he was desirous of obtaining. Among works of this nature, he (Mr. Denison) saw in his room a publication of which he had never even heard the existence, until he saw it there, intitled "The Devil's Pulpit." It was published in numbers, and the House, he was sure, would concur with him in opinion, that it was proper to prevent such works from being received in a prison. The writings of Volney or Gibbon, besides the books which he had enumerated, Mr. Taylor had full permission to peruse; but on the publications to which he had just alluded the visiting Magistrates had very properly laid an interdict, conceiving, that it was very wrong to allow them to be received within the walls of that prison. He certainly entertained doubts whether it was prudent to prosecute a man who had conducted himself as the person about whom he was now addressing the House had done. He doubted whether any beneficial result flowed from convictions arising out of blasphemous attacks on Christianity, inasmuch as, by such a course of proceeding, the iniquitous doctrines which it was the object, of the prosecution to check were too often more disseminated; and a man was declared a martyr, who was fitter for another place rather than a prison; but he had no doubt, that a person who was, under the laws, sentenced to confinement, ought to be made to conform to prison regulations. Mr. Taylor had been made to do so, and that was the ground of all his complaints.
§ Mr. Briscoesaid, being one of the 198 visiting Magistrates of the prison, he was anxious to address a few observations to the House. He was aware, that the subject had excited a good deal of public attention, it having been noticed in the newspapers, and various remarks had been made upon it. The cause of complaint which had been urged by Mr. Taylor might be resolved into two points—viz., as to his correspondence, and to the visits of his friends. The sentence, the House would bear in mind, was imprisonment, and imprisonment only; and the crime of which he was convicted was a misdemeanour. Under these circumstances, there ought to be, towards any individual so convicted, no severity. As had just been observed, the punishment was imprisonment only. With respect to the first complaint—as to an unlimited correspondence—that, he thought, could not be tolerated, lest the doctrines which it was the object of the prosecution to check should be promulgated. For his own part, he had always considered the rules and regulations of Horsemonger-lane prison too strict, and had endeavoured, but without effect, to have some alteration made in them. The Magistrates had received a letter from the Secretary of State for the Home Department, directing their attention to Mr. Taylor's case. Greater indulgences had been shown to him than to other prisoners, and this had given cause of complaint to the other prisoners. It was unwise to make distinctions in the treatment of prisoners generally, but, in this case, Mr. Taylor had received the education of a gentleman, and had been accustomed to live in a different manner from the ordinary run of prisoners. He did not mean to say additional indulgences ought to be granted him on that account, but that the ordinary regulations of the prison should be less severe in their application to him than to other prisoners. It was but just to Mr. Taylor, to say, that what had been stated in the newspapers of his conduct at chapel was untrue. He did not say "gammon" where the response was "Amen." Mr. Taylor appeared to labour under nervous excitement. He seemed unwilling to give trouble to those about him; and receiving a remonstrance from him as a visiting Magistrate, he had erased the sentence placed over the door of his cell, stating, that the Christian religion was the greatest curse that ever befel the human race.
§ Mr. Trevorthought it right, that the prisoner should be prevented from employing the liberty of correspondence as the means of circulating his opinions. It was of importance that the prison regulations should be strictly enforced in such cases, at the same time that every indulgence consistent with the prisoner's situation should be allowed.
§ Mr. Huntwas glad the case had been brought forward by the two Members for the county. When he was imprisoned he made complaints, and they were represented as false and groundless in that House by the Members for the county. The matter was afterwards sent before a Committee, and those complaints, which both Members and Magistrates said were false, were completely substantiated. It was going beyond the law, to prevent a man, who was confined only for a misdemeanour, from corresponding. What was worse, the law was unequal. Mr. Carlile was imprisoned not far off for a similar offence, and he was allowed to correspond freely, and to see his friends in his room. Nothing could justify such restriction of correspondence, but an apprehension that it was intended to employ it as a means of escape. He knew from experience, that the information of gaolers and turnkeys was the last thing in the world that should be relied upon. Mr. Taylor, he believed, advocated very Utopian doctrines, but the course pursued towards him would only have the effect of giving him the merit of martyrdom in the eyes of many people. He knew nothing of him or his doctrines, having never seen him but once, at a public meeting. The public mention of those publications, and the frequent mention of them, only aggravated the evil. In consequence of the notice taken the other night by the member for Dundalk (Mr. Gordon) of The Poor Man's Guardian, the sale of it had increased from 3,000 to 11,000 per week, and the editor would have to thank the hon. member for Dundalk for quadrupling the sale of his publication.
§ Mr. James E. Gordonwas sorry to see in the House something like indulgent feelings towards Mr. Taylor, very different from those evinced towards other persons. He was intitled to no indulgence. He was convicted of blasphemy. It was an ominous symptom to see him meet with more indulgence than others. He must attribute it to that power he possessed of wielding 200 the Press. His superior education and station in life ought to be rather a cause for a more rigid enforcement of the law than for indulgence. No man had done more to disseminate moral and physical evil. The increased circulation to which the member for Preston alluded, was not to be attributed to him (Mr. Gordon), for he had only done his duty in bringing it under the notice of the House. It was owing to the relaxation of the law, to the neglect of those whose duty it was to put down such publications. In one of them the Royal Family was spoken of as the curse of the country, and the member for Preston himself, after coming forward in this House and calling The Poor Man's Guardian seditious trash, had since written to the authors of the work, praising and encouraging their publication. ["No," from Mr. Hunt.]—Do you deny it?
§ Mr. Gordon,after a pause, and pulling out a bundle of papers—"Do you still deny it?"—he could produce the letter.
§ The Speakerinformed the hon. Member, that he was out of order in addressing any hon. Member personally.
§ Mr. Gordonsaid, he was not aware that he had been out of order in putting the question to the member for Preston, knowing, that he addressed a letter to the writers of this trash, applauding them for having written it, and recommending them to continue their publication.
Mr. Lambsaid, he had before expressed his opinion of these debates, to which the member for Dundalk seemed so very partial. The question was, whether the gaol regulations were to be carried into effect against this individual or not? They had been already very considerably relaxed with respect to him, and he hoped his future conduct would prove him worthy of such relaxation.
Mr. O' Connellsaid, the member for Dundalk charged the House with indulgence towards the prisoner. Now the complaint was, that Mr. Taylor had been convicted for a misdemeanour, and that his punishment in prison was more severe than that usually inflicted in such cases. He complained, that he was not allowed liberty of correspondence, while Carlile, as great a blasphemer as he, laid under no such restriction. If Magistrates were to make prison regulations, they ought to be uniform. The true spirit of Christianity did not show itself in chains and gaols, but 201 in charity to all mankind, whatever might be their opinions. Persecution might make hypocrites, but it never yet made converts. No person would suspect him of being friendly to the opinions of this man, or to his publications; but prosecutions only gave an importance to this miserable trash which it could not otherwise obtain. The Christian religion might rest securely on its own basis. It was not Christianity to trample even on the victims of just punishment.
An Hon. Memberwas of opinion, that all prosecutions for blasphemy were both injurious and impolitic.
Sir. F. Burdettsaid, Mr. Taylor's opinions had nothing to do with the question, which was, whether or not he was harshly treated? Some relaxation was ordered from high authority, and that was proof that he had been harshly treated. Why should he be restricted from seeing his friends? Magistrates and keepers of prisons had no right to inflict those hardships, and the imposition of such restrictions was altogether illegal. Mr. Taylor ought not to have them inflicted on him, however offensive his opinions might be.
Mr. Denisonsaid, the Magistrates refused Mr. Taylor the power of correspondence, without sending his letters open, from the dread entertained by them of his introducing his doctrines among the prisoners. His hon. colleague and he were but two out of a Committee of twelve Magistrates who had the superintendance of the prison, and they had done all in their power to alleviate the confinement of Mr. Taylor, as well as every other prisoner, but they were sometimes in a minority.
§ Mr. Briscoewished it to be understood, that he had distinctly said, no indulgence was to be shown to Mr. Taylor on account of the offence for which he was imprisoned, but what had been done was upon public principles, and he wished every one imprisoned for similar offences should be treated in the same way. He knew nothing of the individual, his trial, or conviction, except that he knew Mr. Taylor had been convicted of a misdemeanour, but he thought he ought not to suffer greater severity than other persons confined in other gaols did for the like offences.
§ Mr. James E. Gordonhad never charged the hon. Member with having given facilities to the prisoner to distribute his mischievous publications, but he thought improper indulgences were given to him, 202 which were denied to others, particularly as to seeing his friends.
§ Petition laid on the Table.