Lords Sitting of 20 June 1834

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a second times:—Pensions (Civil Offices); County Rate; Dramatic Performances.
Petitions presented. By the Earl of ROSEBERY, from Whit-born, for a Better System of Church Patronage in Scotland.—By Viscount STRANGFORD, from three Places, for Protection to the Church of Scotland.—By the Earl of DURHAM, from a Dissenting Congregation in Leeds, for Relief to the Dissenters.—By the Bishop of St. ASAPH, from several Places, against the Admission of Dissenters to the Universities.—By Viscount MELVILLE, from the Schoolmasters of Dalkeith, for an increased Stipend.—By the Earl of HARROWBY, from Almondbury, for the Repeal of the Sale of Beer Act.—By the Dukes of GLOUCHESTER and WELLINGTON, the Archbishop of YORK, Marquesses of BUTE and BRISTOL, Earls HARROWBY and WINCHILESEA, Lords ROLLS, DYNEVOR, KENYON, and the Bishop of St. ASAPH, from a great Number of Places, for Protection to the Established Church, against the Separation of Church and State, and the Admission of Dissenters to the Universities.

DON CARLOS AND DON MIGUEL.
The Marquess of Londonderrysaid, that on a previous occasion, in the absence of the noble Earl at the head of the Government, he had put a question to a noble Marquess, in order to know when they were likely to receive the ratifications of the quadripartite Treaty. The noble Marquess, in answer had been pleased to be somewhat jocular on it, and had said, that the illustrious Don Miguel was safely on board one of his Majesty's ships. If so, that prince ought to have arrived by this time; but he had not yet heard of his arrival. He did not now intend to put another question on that subject, for he
596
was well aware, that by the departure from the system of non-interference. Don Miguel had been driven out of his kingdom, and so had Don Carlos, and he believed that the same sort of non-interference would be adopted to keep them out. What he wished to ask was this—in what manner did the Ministers intend to receive the illustrious prince Don Carlos, who, he was informed, had now landed at Portsmouth: He put no question about Portugal, for since the unfortunate situation in which that country was now placed, all eyes had been turned towards Spain. He understood that Don Carlos had now been one week at Portsmouth. How long he was to be detained there, it might be as well to know. There had been great delay—it was not for him to say unnecessary delay, but great delay in receiving the illustrious prince. There had been some sort of omission as to the preparations for his reception. He understood that the Under Secretary of State for the Foreign Department had gone down to Portsmouth, accompanied by the Marquess of Mira-flores, and that there had been attempts made to induce the illustrious prince now on our shores, to renounce the rights he possessed. If these reports were true, they were beyond anything that had ever been heard of in history. The reports were so general that he really thought he was doing a favour to the noble Earl in giving him an opportuntity of correcting them and of denying them in the face of Europe. The illustrious prince, Don Carlos, had the same right to protection and to good treatment as Donna Maria and as Charles 10th, and he did not believe it possible that the Government would hold out an example of attempting to seduce men in their misfortunes from the path which their duty to themselves and their country required them to follow. He hoped it was not true that attempts had been made to induce the illustrious prince to do that which might hereafter prejudice his cause, and the cause of Spain. He hoped he should receive a satisfactory answer to the question as to the way in which the Government was to receive Don Carlos.
Earl Greywas afraid that upon this, as upon a former occasion, his answer might not be deemed satisfactory by the noble Marquess opposite. Indeed, he hardly knew what the noble Marquess wished him to affirm or deny. The noble

597
Marquess had entered into a desultory statement of what he supposed to be the object of the arrival of the prince, and he asked in what manner Don Carlos was intended to be received? He (Earl Grey) must disclaim any supposition that it was necessary for him to make any statement because certain statements had been made elsewhere, he could not tell by whom, nor on what authority. But he was ready to admit, that Mr. Backhouse had been sent from the Foreign Office down to Portsmouth. With respect to the object of that mission, if, on any future occasion, the noble Marquess thought fit to make a Motion on the subject, he should be ready to meet it; but he should now only say, (expressing no opinion on the question, whether Don Carlos was or was not connected with the cause of the Peninsula)—he should only say, that Don Carlos would be regarded as a prince of the royal blood of Spain, and as such he would be received, and treated with the attention and honour due to his station.
The Marquess of Londonderrysaid, that he hardly knew what the noble Lord meant by saying, that the illustrious prince would be received with the attention due to his rank and station; for if what he had heard was correct, Don Carlos had been riding about Portsmouth in hackney coaches. He had never understood what the policy and the cause were that made Ministers depart from the principle of neutrality. But now that they had departed from it, and that the unfortunate prince was here, he called on them to say whether there had not been a mission from them to induce him to abandon his just rights to the throne of Spain? If such had been the case, he must say, that the mission had been one of the most atrocious that he had ever heard of.
Earl Greyobserved, that when the proper time arrived, the papers, respecting which the noble Marquess had formerly inquired, would be laid upon the Table of the House; and if the noble Marquess thought fit to introduce a Motion on the subject to which he had now referred, he should be prepared to meet it.

JUDICIAL BUSINESS—ABSENCE OF THE SPEAKER.
The Earl of Eldonwished to call the attention of their Lordships to a subject of much importance to the character of that House. The attendance of the twelve Judges had been re-
598
quired by that House to give their opinions upon some question relating to a writ of error he believed. Upon that occasion, neither the Lord Chancellor, nor the deputy Speaker, nor any law Lord was present to receive them. This, he could not help remarking, was most irregular, contrary to the forms of their Lordships' House, and contrary also to their dignity and interests. He recollected a case wherein the twelve Judges having given their opinions, the Lord Chancellor satisfied the House that they were all wrong. He recollected another case wherein the Lord Chancellor satisfied the House, not that the opinions were wrong, but that it would be wrong for that House to act upon them. In the present instance he believed the Judges were right, but with such instances on record, was it right that the House should be left with a lay Lord only to guide them? He hoped he should be excused for saying, that he had nothing more at heart than that the judicial business of that House should be properly conducted. He would venture to say, that the esteem and respect of the subjects of this country for the House of Lords, as a Court of Judicature, was greater than for any other tribunal in the country. It was necessary that the interests of the suitors should be properly adjudicated upon, and he should give notice of a Motion to the effect, that the opinions of the twelve Judges should never be received in that House unless some one of the Lords mentioned in the Commission of deputy Speaker was present.
The Lord Chancellorwas quite sure that his noble and learned friend was aware that no one felt more strongly than he did that the greatest possible care should be taken to keep in due and regular order, and according to the ordinary form of proceeding, the judicial business of that House; but it was perfectly well known that he was not to sit there on the day in question, for he had made an appointment to sit at ten o'clock in the morning in the Court of Chancery, to hear an appeal, in which the suitors and the parties from the country were kept waiting in town. It was well known that, in consequence of the necessary absence of the Chancellor, who was the principal Speaker of the House, the Crown had always by commission given the power generally to a deputy Speaker to sit and perform the office of Speaker. He was

599
quite sure his noble and learned friend did not mean to say there had never been a deputy Speaker before, because, while the noble and learned Lord held the Great Seals, he (the Lord Chancellor) had argued times without number, cases before his deputies, who consisted of the Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer, the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench, and his honour the Master of the Rolls. There were individuals not Peers appointed to sit as deputy Speakers, and following that practice there had been a commission given to more than one on the present occasion; among the Commissioners were two noble Lords who had belonged to the profession of the law, and the noble Earl who was Chairman of the Committee of that House, and who did not belong to the profession of the law. He believed there had been some misunderstanding, because his noble friend the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench had been unexpectedly detained in another place. There certainly was no law Lord present when the learned Judges gave judgment; the consequence of which was, that they would either have to give their opinions to a lay Lord, which seemed to strike his noble and learned friend as something too horrible to be borne, or they would have to go away and come back on another occasion. He begged leave to observe he was not answerable for their having given their opinions to a lay Lord. He was not there at the time, but the moment he heard of it his answer was, that, if the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench was still detained, let him know, and he would break up the Court of Chancery, and go down to the House of Lords instantly. He hoped his noble and learned friend would reflect a little before he made his Motion, for he could not avoid thinking, regard being had to the nature of the functions of that House, that it would be very awkward, not to say impossible, for them to put upon their votes a Resolution which amounted to this, that the whole of the Peers were not competent to discharge the judicial business of that House. If the House adopted the Resolution, of which his noble friend had given notice, it would deprive itself of the exercise of one of the highest functions it could possibly exercise, without the presence of the nominee of the Crown. He would put it upon constitutional grounds, whether the House
600
would, for the first time admit, that the Crown had a right to interfere in the performance of the judicial functions of the House? It was true that the Crown issued the Commission for the appointment of a deputy Speaker, but it was equally as true that the House could, at any time, name a deputy Speaker for a day or an hour. If, therefore, the noble Earl proposed to pass a Resolution that the opinions of the twelve Judges should never be taken without the presence of a law Lord, he should object. The constitution of the country might be badly contrived, but by the constitution lay Lords as well as law Lords had a right to judge of all legal matters in that House; that was the legal and constitutional view of the subject; and surely if ever there was a case in which a lay Lord might without danger sit at that Table, it was when he had only to ask questions of the Judges, and put their opinions to the vote. For these reasons he hoped that his noble and learned friend would re-consider the subject before he brought forward his Motion, pointing out such distinctions as he had adverted to. A case came before the House, in which the Judges came to a unanimous decision, no judgment of the House was then given, but that of the Judges was taken. The decision of the House on the subject was given yesterday when he was present, in which he took no small part, and in which exemplary justice was done, by the appeal being dismissed with costs. If ever there was a case in which the sitting of a lay Lord was harmless, surely it must be in such a case as that.
The Earl of Eldonassured their Lordships, that in bringing this matter under their notice, he was actuated by no personal view whatever. He was solely influenced by a desire to perform his duty according to the dictates of his conscience. He was not satisfied with the statement of the noble and learned Lord; but he was satisfied that the ancient forms of that House must be kept up, in order to enable it to retain the respect of the country. That House, he would venture to say, had been considered as a House as useful to the public as any other House in the kingdom. The noble Earl referred to the Orders of the House, to show that the Lord Chancellor ought to be present on occasions such as he had adverted to. He (Earl Eldon) never left the woolsack

601
during the time he was Chancellor without having communication with the individual who was to sit in his absence. He did not know how the present Commission was worded; but formerly it gave authority to a Deputy-speaker to sit only in the necessary absence of the Lord Chancellor. He was sure, that if the people of this country should be told that the Judges of the land attended that House to give their opinions, and that the House was left to itself in the absence of the Lord Chancellor, it would greatly lessen the dignity, importance, and character of the House in their eyes. He thought they had enough to do to retain the respect of the country in the position in which that House was at present placed, without abdicating all the forms and preservatives of dignity.
The Lord Chancellorcould not allow the extraordinary observations of the noble and learned Lord to go forth to the public without remarking that he seemed to mistake the form for the substance of dignity. He must once more repeat, he had nothing whatever to do with what passed in their Lordships' House upon the occasion alluded to. When he heard, that the Judges were in attendance, he sent from the Court of Chancery to desire they would wait for a short time, and that his noble friend, the Lord Chief Justice of the King's Bench would be in attendance, intimating at the same time, that if his noble friend did not soon arrive, he would attend in person. Was it any fault of his, he begged to ask, that the Judges were impatient, and did not wait his arrival? The Judges were virtute officii attendants of that House; and if he chose, while the House was adjourned during pleasure, to sit in the Court of Chancery, it was their duty to wait until such time as he (the Lord Chancellor) came down and took his seat upon the Woolsack. He was the Speaker of their Lordships' House as well as Chancellor, and if, in the discharge of his duty in the latter capacity, he went from that House to the Court of Chancery, the Judges, knowing that their opinion was required by their Lordships, were bound, as their attendants, to await their pleasure, until such time as it was convenient for him to take his seat on the Woolsack. He did not, however, believe, that the Judges were impatient. He did not believe, that if any
602
noble Lord had taken the trouble to say, "The Chancellor will be here presently," they would have objected to await his arrival. He entirely acquitted them of that charge, because he was convinced they knew their duty too well to manifest impatience, even if they felt it. To return, however, to the speech of his noble and learned friend. He called upon their Lordships to mark how venturesome had been his noble and learned friend in his application of what had fallen from him respecting the judicial privileges of their Lordships' House. His noble and learned friend said, there were cases in which lay Lords had decided on questions of the greatest importance. He stated one case in particular, in which, upon the Chancellor and Judges differing upon a point of law involving a question of the greatest importance, the two lay Lords in attendance decided between them. "When doctors differ, who shall end the strife?" was a common inquiry enough; but in the case alluded to by the noble and learned Lord, it would appear, that two lay Lords decided upon a question of law between the twelve Judges of the land, and the Lord High Chancellor. It was, no doubt, very well, theoretically speaking, to clothe the lay Lords with the power of sitting on the Woolsack, under any circumstances; but, practically, it was clear that the Chancellor's appeal from the Judges to a lay Lord was not calculated to be productive of much advantage. The charge, however, in the present ca e was, that in the absence of the Deputy-speakers, a lay Lord sat on the Woolsack, heard the opinions of the Judges, and put the questions on those opinions. Now, if a lay Lord was competent to decide between the Chancellor and the Judges, surely he was competent to sit on the Woolsack to put the question to the Judges. With all the tenderness, therefore, that he felt for the privileges of the House, he did not think that those privileges would be consulted by the proposed Motion of his noble and learned friend.
Lord Wynfordobserved, that it was due to himself to say, that he would have been present if he had had any idea of what was to take place. The constitutional principle was, that the Deputy-speakers should be appointed by the King, and it was only when they were not appointed by the King, that the House had a right to appoint them. He was far from

603
denying, that every Peer was competent to fill the judicial situation on the Woolsack; but it was well known, that it had been always the practice in that House to have, on such occasions, the assistance of Peers who had been in the legal profession. How, indeed, any decision upon such questions could be satisfactory, without the presence of a lawyer, he was at a loss to conceive.
The Duke of Wellingtonsaid, that all that is noble and learned friend near him had stated was, that a Lord Chancellor ought to be on the Woolsack when the Judges delivered their opinions. No one could deny the great advantages which must result from having a Lord Chancellor present on such an occasion. He was quite certain that there was not one of their Lordships who did not agree with him in that opinion.
Earl Greyrose only to state what he conceived to be the nature of the question. There could be no doubt that, on such an occasion as that adverted to, it was very advantageous that a judicial Peer should be present. That had been the wholesome practice of that House; and he was sure that his noble and learned friend on the Woolsack would be the last man to say, it was not a wholesome practice. But, acknowledging that such was the general practice, it was a very different thing to say, that in no case whatever should a judicial question be decided, unless a judicial Peer were on the Woolsack. It would surely be much better to leave the matter as it stood, than to affirm any such proposition.
The Duke of Cumberlandwas persuaded, after what had just fallen from the noble Earl, that such an occurrence would never again take place.
The Earl of Shaftesburytrusted the House would believe, that his absence on the occasion alluded to, was not the result of any disrespect or inattention to his duty, but from his having been led to expect that the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench would be present. There had been occasions within every one's experience, on which a Judge, who was a commoner, having been made a Deputy-speaker of that House, it had been necessary, although in the presence of that Deputy-speaker, for a lay Lord to put the question to the Judges, and to take the opinion of the House.
Lord Denmandid not rise to prolong
604
the discussion; but because he felt it due to himself to state the cause of his not being in the House at the time alluded to. He was not aware, that he was expected to attend, until he was in the Court of King's Bench. He there received an earnest request to meet the other Judges in the House of Lords. It so happened, however, that a criminal case was trying before him. It was, of course, utterly impossible that, under such circumstances, a Jury and witnesses could be left by the Judge. He was, therefore, under the necessity of remaining in the Court till the trial was over, and he was then informed that the House of Lords had adjourned.
The Earl of Eldonsaid, after what had fallen from several noble Lords, he should decline making his Motion.

PRISON DISCIPLINE.
Lord Wharnclifferose to make his Motion for a Commission to inquire into the State of Prison Discipline. There could be no subject of greater importance and of greater interest than to ascertain that proper sentences should be pronounced upon criminals, and that those sentences should be really and efficiently carried into effect. It might be asked, why he undertook to introduce such a subject? The answer was, that as Chairman of Quarter Sessions, he had abundant opportunities of ascertaining what effect the present prison discipline had upon criminals, and he did not believe that it was beneficial. He would venture to say, with humble submission to the Judges of the land, that a Chairman of Quarter Sessions had more opportunities than those eminent persons, to observe the effects of punishments. The Judges came only occasionally among the people. The Chairman of Quarter Sessions lived among them; he saw the effect of the law in domestic life, and in detail he traced its operation in the haunts of criminals, and in the homes of the poor; he saw the same individuals brought over and over again before him, proving to demonstration that the punishments he had inflicted were not effective. He would endeavour to show, that the whole of our present system was founded on wrong grounds, and that, instead of prisons tending to the discouragement of crime, they served only as schools for vice. The persons sent to them came out much worse than they went in; and what was called punishment

605
was less a preventive and a privation, than it was an encouragement and a mockery. What ought to be the object of punishment? In inflicting it, the House did not look at the individual, but that the punishment inflicted upon him deterred others from the commission of crime. That was the legitimate object of all punishment. He had, therefore, to show that it did not deter men from the commission of crime; and to establish his position, he was first bound to show that crime had been progressive in this country. He would refer for the proof of that to the Report of the several Committees an the subject, and would take three periods of seven years each; the first ending with December, 1817; the second ending with December, 1824; the third ending with December, 1831. In the first period, the number of persons criminally convicted was 67,000; in the second period, 92,848; in the third period, 121,000. The Returns of the present year showed that this progressive increase was going on. In fact, he knew from his own experience that crime was increasing, for during the last twelve years the number of trials at the Sessions in the county of York had increased from 250 to 900. Under these circumstances, the time was surely come when an attempt ought to be made to discover some mode of putting a stop to so dreadful and growing an evil. He did not mean to say, that this was a new subject, on the contrary, it had of late been much discussed, and it might be advisable for their Lordships to consider first the steps which had of late years been taken with reference to the subject? The consolidation of the Criminal-law by Sir Robert Peel, and the better arrangement of the Statutes, deserved to be mentioned with praise as tending to remedy the confusion which previously existed. Another step was the removal of the punishment of death in most of those cases in which it had formerly been inflicted; but it did not appear that this change had had any effect in the discouragement of crime, on the contrary, one crime at least from which the punishment of death had been removed, had certainly increased; he meant forgery. In other cases the effect of the removal was, at least, doubtful. Another step which had been taken, was the establishment of an efficient body of police. From that establishment, no doubt, the public had derived great ad-
606
vantages in many respects; but it certainly did not appear that it had had the effect of diminishing crime. Then came the alterations which had been made in prison discipline. The system upon which those alterations were founded, was the division of the prisoners into classes for the purpose of preventing the less depraved from being contaminated by associating with the more depraved. The classification, however, was founded upon false assumptions. The greatest number of persons in prison were sent there for want of sureties. Such prisoners were put into the same class with persons charged with misdemeanors; some of whom were the greatest vagabonds upon the face of the earth. Individuals, therefore, who were put in prison merely for want of sureties experienced all the contamination of an association with persons charged with misdemeanors, and if they were apt scholars, came out of prison prepared for every description of roguery. There was another plan which had been tried with a view of producing Reform in the great mass of the people: and that was education. He confessed he was one of those who thought education would have greatly decreased crime. He regretted to say, that he had been disappointed. He believed that the kind of education which had been afforded had increased crime; and the more he saw, the more he was convinced of that fact. He did not doubt, that the general system of education was very valuable for some purposes; but he very much doubted if the present system gave to the individuals who were subjected to it, such a power over their minds as enabled them to resist the temptation to commit crime. He was fortified in this opinion by the Report of the French Commissioners on the state of education in the United States, who declared it to be the result of their inquiry, that the more knowledge was diffused the more crime was increased. They attributed it to the circumstance, that knowledge created wants among the humbler classes, which the perpetration of crime alone could gratify. Knowledge multiplied social relations; it produced a desire for various enjoyments; and the means of cultivating those relations, and indulging in those enjoyments could not be honestly obtained by the lower classes in their present condition. Such was the opinion of the French Commissioners. He was very much afraid that those Gen-

607
tlemen were right, and that the greater the diffusion of education, the greater the temptation to crime. He by no means doubted that a proper discipline of the mind in youth was highly advantageous, but he very much doubted if the mere acquisition of knowledge was equally beneficial. Of this he was certain, and he said it with regret, that the kind and degree of education hitherto introduced into this country, had not diminished crime. Having thus referred to the chief preventives which had been resorted to for the diminution of crime and shown that they had failed in their object, he came to the question—could nothing be devised calculated to improve the morals of the people, and afford a rational hope that its adoption might lead to a diminution of crime, by the correction of vice and the encouragement of virtue? He thought some plan might be devised. He thought that a system of prison discipline might be established, although, certainly, at a considerable expense, the effect of which would be found exceedingly beneficial. The two principles on which that system ought to be founded, were—first, that the prisoners should not be allowed to congregate together; secondly, that where that regulation could not be completely adopted, they should be compelled to observe the strictest silence. Such a system was not so difficult as some persons might imagine. It had been already tried in the United States of America to an extent, and with a severity, the adoption of which in this country he should be very far, indeed, from recommending. Not only had prisoners been confined by night in separate cells, and prohibited during working time from speaking to one another, but they had undergone a much more regular system of coercion. They had been employed in large bodies in clearing the ground, and had been driven into the forest to cut down trees for three months together, and though thus congregated they were not only compelled to observe silence, but if any one of them was seen giving even a nod or a wink to a fellow-prisoner, he was immediately taken up, by the orders of the superintendant, and severely flogged. It was evident that nothing like such a system as that could be introduced into this country without shocking the feelings of the whole nation. But without proceeding to such an extremity, he was convinced that
608
a system of silent labour might be advantageously established in the prisons of England. He was happy to say, that upon this subject he spoke from experience. The system had been tried in the West Riding of Yorkshire for some time, and he had been informed by a gentleman in whom he could confide, that it had produced excellent effects, and that he had never seen prisoners in such a state of discipline. Silence was preserved by stopping the meals of those by whom it was broken. It certainly might be exceedingly difficult to secure perfect silence, but not difficult to prevent that conversation by which any of the inmates of the prison could be contaminated. The next point to which he desired to draw their Lordships' attention was the subject of secondary punishments. Under that term he meant to include all punishments short of death. On that subject, also, he could not help thinking that we might derive a very useful lesson from the conduct of the United States. In Pennsylvania, where the punishment of death was abolished, an example had been set worthy of imitation. In that State they had built a prison, called the Cherry Hill Prison, the system of which consisted of confinement in entire solitude and silence. Each prisoner had a cell of certain dimensions, considerably larger than in this country, well ventilated, with a yard attached to it, in which to exercise himself. He had certain descriptions of work provided for him—he was allowed a Bible, and certain religious books. From time to time he was visited by the chaplain of the prison, for the purpose of religious instruction and communion; but except on those occasions the door was closed upon him and excluded him from the world. Hopes were held out to him that his imprisonment might be shortened if his conduct were praiseworthy. He, however, believed in his conscience that such an expectation was injurious, and that sentence once passed ought to be carried into complete effect. To hold out to a prisoner the hope, that if his conduct were good his punishment might be shortened, would, in his opinion, lead only to hypocrisy. The general result, however, of the system which he had been describing was, that the health of the prisoners did not suffer, and that eventually they were brought into a state of reformation. Such a system as that he should propose, with refer-

609
ence to all persons imprisoned for a period beyond six months. The Penitentiary at Millbank was, he believed, well adapted for the purpose, but when it was built, persons were ignorant of the best way in which it could be applied. He was exceedingly glad to hear, however, that the attention of his Majesty's Government had been called to this subject; and that they had employed several persons to inquire into it. He had had an opportunity of conversing with one of them, a very intelligent man, and he was happy to say, that there was a prospect that the experiment would be tried at Dartmoor. The discipline at the Penitentiary at Mill-bank was this; the prisoners lived apart, and never saw one another except in the morning when they went to the pump to wash, and during a short period of the day when they worked together. Even then silence was enforced; but, when thirty or forty persons were engaged in labour together, the noise, of course, allowed occasional conversation with impunity. Even there the communication between the prisoners was not entirely suppressed, although the governors, he was sure, did their best to enforce silence. These were the two things—silence and solitude—which appeared to him best adapted to bring the mind of the prisoner into the state most calculated to receive good impressions. The best mode of treating restive horses was, to let them have no sleep; and men were kept in the stables to keep them constantly awake, which effectually subdued their spirit, and made them tractable. So it was with solitude and silence as regarded criminals. He was aware that one great objection which had been urged to his plan was, on the score of expense; but he believed, that the cost of erecting suitable cells would not be more than 250,000 l.—a sum which, as put in competition with the great advantages that might be expected to result from it, was comparatively of no importance. By the statute of the 7th George 4th, c. 74. there were appointed in Ireland, besides the visiting Magistrates, two inspectors-general, who visited all the prisons, and reported their state and regulations from time to time to the Lord-lieutenant. It would, he thought, be a good thing to adopt a similar plan in this country, by which, independently of other advantages, they would be enabled to establish a uniformity of discipline throughout the kingdom. An-
610
other serious evil was, that a great number of persons were committed to prison for small offences—such as misdemeanors, and, in many cases, assaults. He had never been able to understand why some provision should not be made giving a summary jurisdiction to the Petty Sessions in cases of this kind. Some such plan would certainly have the effect of greatly diminishing the numbers of those who now crowded our prisons. Not that he desired to give to two or three Magistrates the power of punishing any individual lightly, or without proper guards and protections. Petty Sessions ought to have the power of summoning a jury de circumstantibus, to try trifling offences. Six would, in most cases, be sufficient: indeed, it would be frequently impossible to get twelve. Six men of common sense would be quite competent to decide all questions of that kind. Thus would they get rid of that large portion of prisoners who were now exposed to the contamination of a gaol for three or four weeks before they could be brought to trial, and whose offences, if found guilty, were so small, as to render that term of imprisonment more than an adequate punishment. The effect of transportation on criminals was a question which had produced great discussion. The right reverend Prelate, the Archbishop of Dublin, and many other writers, had employed their pens upon this subject; but many of them seemed to have proceeded on a wrong foundation. It had been asserted, that the terror of transportation had in a great measure ceased, and that, as a punishment, it had lost its efficacy. He did not believe it. Transportation produced a great effect on the criminal, and upon the friends and neighbours of those who were condemned to it. The terror of transportation might not, perhaps, deter the regular and confirmed thief, but it had a much greater and more extensive effect than was generally believed. But many measures might be adopted to render transportation, or the dread of it, more efficacious. There should be no remission of any part of the sentence under any circumstances. Every man transported should be made to feel, and the public should understand, that he was entirely cut off from his friends, country, and connexions, during the full period of his sentence. Moreover, there should be no transportation for so short a period as seven years: fourteen years, or

611
at the least ten, should be the minimum duration of transportation; he should, perhaps, say ten years, for he believed no man's life was worth ten years' purchase. It would also be advisable to check, if not entirely to destroy, the transport's means of communication with this country. These regulations would, he thought, render the punishment effectual. Even the most hardened thieves dreaded a long separation from their connexions, and from that round of riotous dissipation which for them had so many charms. The state of the prisons, too, called loudly for reform; and the prisons of London were amongst the foremost which required amendment: their state was really disgraceful; and, however innocent a prisoner might be, if he were once committed to a London prison, there was no possibility of his escaping contamination. The number that annually passed through these prisons was enormous; the leaven of corruption was sufficiently strong to infect the whole mass. He entreated the attention of his noble friend opposite (Lord Melbourne) to this subject. He knew, that it was one which had occupied a large share of his noble friend's thoughts, and surely there was none more important to the well-being of society. He also entreated the attention of those of their Lordships who, as Magistrates in their respective districts, had it in their power to effect many improvements in our prison discipline. He had gone through all the topics to which it was his intention to advert. He would conclude by again entreating the attention of the House to this subject, and by expressing a hope, that what had passed that night would have the effect of rousing the public to the importance of these reforms. He had great confidence in the intentions of his noble friend, the Secretary of State, and in his sincere desire to effect these reforms. Under these circumstances, he trusted the noble Lord would not oppose his Motion. The noble Lord concluded by moving an Address to his Majesty, praying him to issue a Commission "to inquire into, and report on, the state of gaols and houses of correction in the corporate cities and towns of Great Britain, and into the classification, &c. of the prisoners, and the regulations of the gaols, and to inquire whether any and what alterations were necessary in the government regulations, and construction of such gaols, so as to insure a
612
uniformity of prison discipline throughout the whole of the kingdom of Great Britain."
Viscount Melbournefelt grateful to his noble friend for the pains he had taken on this subject; and he was sure, that their Lordships would join with him in thanking the noble Lord for favouring them with the results of his experience. As the noble Lord had justly stated, no subject required more serious attention; and he trusted, that the speech delivered by the noble Lord that night would have the effect of drawing to it that sober consideration which it so imperiously demanded. It was, indeed, a question which involved, in no slight degree, the well-being of society. He agreed in almost every observation which had fallen from the noble Lord. At the same time, it must be recollected—and what he was going to say was not for the purpose of damping their Lordships' ardour, or to prevent them from adopting measures likely to be efficacious for the purpose which they had in view,—but it must be recollected, that crime had existed in all ages and all times. All nations had employed themselves for the purpose of repressing it, but all attempts at eradication had hitherto been found ineffectual. He, therefore implored their Lordships and the country not to expect too much, or to form too sanguine expectations of the result of any system. No man could know anything of the mind of another, except what he derived from conjectures founded on the knowledge of his own mind. Persons addicted to criminal courses had minds so constituted, that that they could not be understood by those who had not so unfortunately devoted themselves. Those who had plunged into a career of crime had already got over those moral restraints which were the great bonds of society, and the best preventions of crime. They had got over all sense of moral rectitude—they had got over all sense of shame—they had got over all regard for the opinions of friends and relations, or for their own character and respectability in the world; and then came the Legislature with the last resource—the fear of punishment, which could not be expected to exercise a very powerful influence over those who had already leaped over higher barriers and more forcible restraints than any which that House could possibly oppose to them.

613
He made these general reflections, because it had too frequently happened, that the best-considered plans had suffered from too great anticipations of the effects expected from them. He agreed with his noble friend, that the increase of crime in this country was exceedingly alarming. He had before him a return of the committals for the last twenty-four years, from 1810 to 1833 inclusive. Their Lordships were aware that they could only know anything of the state of crime in this country by the returns of offences at Sessions and Assizes. He knew, that there were many omissions. All who were convicted on summary process by Justices of the Peace were omitted—as were also all against whom there was not sufficient evidence to warrant conviction, although morally criminal; and all whom the negligence, timidity, or lenity of prosecutors suffered to escape. At the same time the return included all those in whose cases it appeared that no crime at all was committed, and which was a pretty large list—all those who were brought to trial for small offences, as it appeared to him most unnecessarily, and to gratify vindictiveness on the part of prosecutors. Taking into consideration, therefore, what was included on the one hand, and what was omitted on the other, the returns probably furnished a pretty fair average. During the first six years from 1810 to 1816, the average in each year was 6,405; while, during the next six years, from 1816 to 1821, the average was 12,945 per annum, being the enormous increase of 102 per cent. This was a much greater proportional increase than any which had taken place since, and this increase took place simultaneously with the first years of the peace. The first six years were years of war, the next six years were years of peace. For his own part he was very little inclined to trust to any general theory on these subjects, and very little inclined to trust to deductions drawn from such tables; but so great an increase as this, at such a juncture, evidently proved, that the change from war to peace must have had a powerful influence on the increase of crime. The nation had been so long engaged in war that the occupations, habits, and manners of the people were completely adapted to that state, and perhaps, no society had ever undergone a more complete change than that which was consequent on the return from war
614
to peace. During the subsequent periods the increase was much less. From 1822 to 1827, the increase was twelve per cent, and from 1827 to 1833 thirty-one per cent. It was true, as his noble friend had stated, that this increase of crime had taken place during a period when the greatest exertions were made to improve the moral condition of the country. This had been stated by his noble friend with great candour and moderation: but in other places it had frequently been stated with great bitterness, and in the shape of a taunt. It had been asked what had the Church—what had our schools—our mechanics' institutes and societies—done for the moral improvement of the people? This was not a fair and just way of reasoning. It was necessary to consider what these persons were graciously pleased to leave out of their consideration—the strength of the antagonist forces against which they had to strive. Neither ought the increase of population to be forgotten. It was to be expected, that more crime would be committed by a larger than a smaller population; and it should be remembered also, that if crime had increased, the country had greatly increased in wealth, luxury, indulgence, and extent of desire, which were the real causes of and instigations to crime. It was against these antagonist powers, that the moral forces of society had to contend, and, considering their potency, he thought the moral powers had kept their ground pretty well; nor was it to be made a charge against them, that they had not produced what, in such a state of society, was an impossibility—viz. perfect purity and virtue. His noble friend had said, that he did not perceive that any of those advantages had resulted from education which had been anticipated, nor did he expect that any of those advantages would flow from it in future. But his noble friend had not made any distinction between education and the objects to which it was directed. The object of education was the diffusion of knowledge, and knowledge, as they were justly told, was power. But power of itself was neither good nor bad, but beneficial or disadvantageous according as it was used or applied. Knowledge itself did not secure virtue, and they knew, by melancholy examples, that the possession of the highest mental endowments, and the most

615
cultivated intellect, did not save the possessors from the stains of immorality and vice. Bonis literis Grâcis imbutus, bonam mentem non induerat. The effects resulting from education must depend on the nature and objects of the education. If the education were such as to inspire the lower orders with opinions above their situations, and to impart to them a dista6te for labour, it would be the most fatal and destructive gift which could be presented to them. They would present them with an apple from the tree of death. But if the education given to them were such as to teach them the necessity of labour, and of conforming themselves to their situations in life, he could have no doubt that education, based upon such principles, and conducted in such a manner, would be productive of the most advantageous results. He certainly agreed with his noble friend, that it was highly desirable that a better and more uniform system should be adopted for the general government of prisons. His noble friend knew, that he (Lord Melbourne) had not lost sight of the matter, and had, indeed, anticipated him, by stating most of the measures which Government had taken into their consideration. The Government had, as their Lordships were aware, selected a gentleman for the purpose of going to America, and examining very scrupulously and minutely into the state of the penitentiary system in that country. That Gentleman had now returned, and they might very shortly expect that his Report would be made available to them. He would, therefore, put it to his noble friend, whether it would not be better to wait for that Report, in order the better to consider the subject in all its parts and bearings, before so decided a step should be taken as that now proposed. A Committee of the House of Commons, in the Session before the last, made a very minute inquiry into this subject, and recommended, that the large building on Dartmoor, which had formerly been appropriated to the reception of prisoners, should now be devoted to this object, for the purpose of trying the system. Government had resolved to adopt that suggestion, and to propose a grant for that purpose before the close of the present Session. It was intended also to add a clause to the Bill for Trial of Offences in the Metropolis enabling the Court to send any person convicted in London to any prison in the
616
metropolis, and to make the Penitentiary a prison for reform. If there should hereafter turn out to be any necessity for a Commission, the Ministers would be ready to assent to issuing one. The noble Lord would not doubt the readiness of the Government to issue a Commission to inquire into the subject; but at present he thought it advisable to wait for the Report. The suggestion of the noble Lord to establish in England, as in Ireland, inspectors-general of the prisons, was, in his opinion, a very good one, and worthy of adoption. These being the views of the Government, and these views so nearly coinciding with those of his noble friend, he trusted his noble friend would feel the propriety of not pressing his Motion on the present occasion.
The Lord Chancellorshould not think he was discharging his duty, if he did not make a few observations on a subject so very candidly, with so much moderation, with no exaggeration, and with so much philosophical calmness, brought before the House. His noble friend, who had introduced this Motion, was of all individuals, in or out of that House, the one who, out of the profession of the law, had more opportunities than any other of seeing the working of our system of criminal law, from his situation as Chairman of the west riding of the county of York. It was very possible that the diminution of crime had not borne that proportion which sanguine men expected to the progress of improvement in society. But this circumstance ought not to fill them at present with despair, with apprehension for the future, or regret for their past efforts, or even make them disinclined to continue those efforts in the same direction. The question in this case was rather an abstract one, and did not appear to lead directly to any practical result. It was, whether or not the increase of knowledge—the more general diffusion of it amongst all classes of the community—tended to prevent the commission of crime? He was far from being able to come to the conclusion which had been some what more dogmatically stated than he should have expected in the report of two French Gentlemen sent out by the French King, that it was now universally admitted, that those parts of the world where knowledge was most diffused were not the most exempt from crime, but rather the contrary. Who had ever ex-

617
pected, that increasing the knowledge of the community would immediately and directly have the effect of diminishing crime? Who had ever entertained such an expectation had no right to complain of disappointment when he found the effect did not follow his meritorious labours, because he had formed groundless and unreasonable expectations. The tendency of knowledge—at least, its ultimate tendency,—was to improve the habits of the people, to better their principles, and to amend all that constituted their character. Principles and feelings combined made up together what was called human character. And that the tendency of knowledge was to amend this character by the operation of knowledge, and in proportion to its diffusion, there could be no doubt. Its tendency was, to increase habits of reflection, to enlarge the mind, and render it more capable of receiving pleasurable impressions from, and taking an interest in, matters of other than mere sensual gratification. This process operated likewise on the feelings, and necessarily tended to improve the character and conduct of the individual, to increase prudential habits, and to cultivate, in their purest form, the feelings and affections of the heart. Now, he took these things to be so pregnant, that it hardly required any illustration from fact, or any demonstration from reasoning, to show that the inevitable consequences of such a change in the human character must inevitably diminish crime. The effects of knowledge were not new; they were well known to the ancients, who had said the same thing in much better words than he could supply—"Emollit mores, nec sinit esse feros." Knowledge increased the prudential habits, and improved the feelings and dispositions of men. That it was the tendency of education to diminish crime was not matter of argument, but of Fact. Let any man go into the gaols, and examine into the condition of the criminals whether they were well educated or not; and he was perfectly certain, that the well-educated would be found to form a very small proportion indeed of the criminals under apprehension, and smaller still of those under conviction. But the way in which this mistake had been committed was this, that in reference to this question knowledge and education were too frequently confounded. It often happened, that what was taken for instruction and
618
education was merely the first step towards it, and many persons were considered as educated who, in reality, were possessed of nothing worthy the name of knowledge or instruction. Reading, writing, and accounts had, during the last thirty years, too often been held to imply education. A person possessed of these might, indeed, have the means of educating himself; but it did not, by any means, follow, that he would exercise those means. It was too much to assume, because in the agricultural districts, where fewer means of education existed, crime was not so abundant as in the better educated and most thickly populated manufacturing districts, that education had no influence in diminishing crime. The kind of civilization which prevailed in the manufacturing districts was not always the most favourable to virtue. In these towns people might be said to live gregariously. But those who jumped to this hasty conclusion overlooked all these circumstances. They said, "So many more persons can read and write in Manchester than in the districts of Rochdale or Saddleworth, with which his noble friend (Lord Wharncliffe) was best acquainted; and there is so much more crime in Manchester than in Saddle-worth; and this is all the result of your fine education." Really this was the most one-eyed view of the subject that was ever taken. No one ever said, that reading meant instruction and education—still less did any one ever say, that reading alone would produce the effects of instruction. His noble friend, who spoke last, and who had spoken so eloquently, had entirely expressed his views: "Knowledge is power in whatever way it is used; but whether that power will be available to virtue depends on the kind of education which has been given. If a people were educated without any regard to moral instruction, it was only putting instruments into their hands which they had every motive to misuse. But it was said, why did not education put a stop to the Commission of crime? Education certainly exercised a great influence over the moral character, but he never yet heard it asserted, that knowledge would alter the nature of the human being, or convert him into something of a higher or purer order than the ordinary race of mortality. His noble friend had made some remarkable statistical statements; and it appeared that more crimes were

619
now committed in eight months, than formerly in twelve; but had the increase of population been taken into account? Was it not to be expected, that the criminals would be more numerous in a population of 14,000,000, than in a population of 7,000,000 or 8,000,000? Within less than a century, the population had doubled. Within the last ten years, or rather in the calculations made from 1821 to 1831, the population of England and Wales had increased two millions. Surely it would not for a moment be expected, that an increase so great could have taken place without a corresponding increase in the number of criminals. There were other elements at work besides the increase of population to which the increase of crime was to be attributed. The defects in our legislation had a direct tendency to create crime, and more especially was crime increased by those acts which enforced the taking of unnecessary oaths on frivolous and frequent occasions. These latter worked evil in a two-fold manner; and he was happy of the occasion which the present discussion afforded, and the temperate manner in which it was conducted, to point out the evils arising from this cause. Its first baleful effect was to diminish the sanctity of the oath itself, and by the frequency of habit to make light of the high moral obligation involved in it. Another evil, and one which it would be very desirable that the law should punish, because it had a tendency to beget habits of perjury—and the Judges knew well how difficult it was to be reached—this was the practice of loose and careless swearing consequent upon the revenue and other similar laws, which begot a callousness and indifference to the obligation, and guaranteed a system of prevarication calculated to obviate the ends of justice to a degree, perhaps, as great as perjury itself. There was, in addition to these, another cause, which had long since been insisted on by Sir Samuel Romilly—namely, the hardness of heart and indifference of feeling created by the witnessing of frequent executions. It was very little more than twenty years since, that eight or ten persons were executed of a morning for depredations upon property only, and where no attack had been made upon life. Of the twenty or thirty thousand persons who witnessed this horrid exhibition, he would ask, would not these rather imagine
620
they beheld some disgusting sacrifice offered up to Moloch, than believe, that they witnessed the execution of a Christian law? Did they return to their homes with greater horror of the crime for which the punishment was inflicted, or a greater dread of that punishment? No; these were the last things which entered into their conceptions; but when they were told that these sacrifices were made—not for highway robbery, nor for any crime which had a tendency to destroy life—they proceeded to their homes with a total disgust of the laws; and a more unwholesome feeling than this could not be generated amongst a people who were bound to be subject to them. Such exhibitions as these—he would not call them murders—but such wholesale bloodshed was calculated to harden and vitiate the hearts of those who witnessed them; and it would take a long course of wholesome education indeed before the evil tendency could be thoroughly corrected. The evils of such a system became rooted in the hearts of the people, and education, instead of rectifying, might, in many instances, only render it worse, by adding the power to the will to do evil. Such influences were too powerful, when long continued, to be quickly overcome. Bad parents might have good children; but so long as the children remained within the influence of their parent's example, their virtue would be very problematical. Though many other counteracting influences to the good effects of education suggested themselves, he would not now press them upon their Lordships. Still there was one which it was impossible to overlook—which operated without intermission, and became worse and worse in every effect which it produced—which extended its evil influence further and wider than any other course, and in some parts of the country lowered the population to the level of the very brute, converting them, by its contaminating effects, into common mendicants and sturdy beggars. The monstrous offset to the advantages of education, the gigantic counteracting agent which stifled the desire of independence, and removed all prudential restraints, was to be found in the Poor-laws, or the abuses which in later times had grown out of them. What mattered it that he and others who laboured with him exerted themselves to diffuse information through the land?—of what avail was it that central

621
schools had been established?—what signified it that books had been circulated, and knowledge rendered so cheap as that there was none so poor who could not at the end of twelve months make up, as it were, a library of those cheap and valuable publications? But what signified all this? It was but as a drop in the ocean; it was but the least imaginable particle of antidote in a full tumbler glass of prussic acid, compared with the power which it possessed to remove the obnoxious and overwhelming influence of the Poor-laws. But, still, he hoped he could say, that this cause of evil had now arrived at its worst, and that an effective remedy was now about to be applied. With these opposing influences, with the vices of a population nearly doubled, with the baleful and widespread evils emanating from bad laws, and worst and most extensive of all, with the abuse of the Poor-laws, education, whilst they existed, might as effectually endeavour to compass the good it was calculated to produce, as a little cock-boat to ride up against the Thames when the current rolled the strongest. The effects of education could only be seen when men were thrown upon their own resources—when the abuses of the Poor-laws, which raged liked an epidemic, were done away with—and when it was no longer a fact, that men might be idle or industrious at their pleasure, and the result be all the same. Neither man nor fiend could devise a law so pregnant with evil, so calculated to remove all restraint upon the passions, and destroy every motive to honest and honourable industry. It was ordained, that man should earn his bread by the sweat of his brow; but here was a law which contravened this ordination, which said, whether the brow be parched with toil or wet with industry, or otherwise—whether you labour or are idle, no matter—though the veriest snail, or merest sluggard, you shall eat up the provision of your industrious fellow-citizen, and his labour shall suffice to support you in your idleness. This law said, in effect, "Do not take the trouble to be prudent; never mind how improvident may be the Union into which you enter; do not care how you desecrate the matrimonial rite, by plunging wives into distress, and bringing children into the world for a heritage of misery and want: never consider these, for we prudent and painstaking men will tax ourselves, and yield
622
up the produce of our industry to support you in your lazy self-gratifying courses, and prolong your idle existence out of the results of our earnings". This was in effect the language which the Poor-laws, as abused, spoke to those disinclined to labour. What could be expected from education under such a system, which opened the door to vice, and rendered the feelings of those who availed themselves of its abuses callous to any touch of virtue or better feeling? Would the persons who were thus encouraged to live upon the industry of others—to pick their pockets indirectly—would they be less likely to do so directly? He hoped he had said enough to show the necessity of taking into account the counteracting causes which operated to prevent the extension of knowledge from producing the effect which, but for these obstacles, its promoters had calculated upon. When the contemplated reformations should take place, then would be seen the improvement which would follow in the train of knowledge. On one good result of education there would be no difference of opinion. There was one class of offences which varied in extent and degree, exactly in proportion with the degree of knowledge which obtained in any community;—and here it was to be observed, that knowledge was not in itself a cause of virtue, for the mind might be improved without any improvement of the disposition, and then knowledge might have the effect of making the mind, which was possessed of it, more active in a wrong course, and more powerful in evil; but it was evident, that in proportion to the learning of a country, crimes of violence became more rare. This was obvious in France, and equally so in this country, although crimes of fraud and larceny had not thus decreased in similar proportion. As regarded the question before their Lordships, notwithstanding his objection to extreme and disproportionate punishments, he would not go the lengths to which many amiable but speculative persons had proceeded, repudiating capital punishment altogether, and who grounded their opposition on perverted texts of Scripture wrested to their purpose. He had frequently expressed his opinion on this subject before, and it was not now necessary that he should go into the reasons upon which he maintained it, but

623
would content himself with merely asserting, that the Legislature had a right by every law, human and divine, to enact the punishment of death, but not except in cases where absolute necessity demanded it, and where no other means could be resorted to for accomplishing that which should be the end and object of all punishment—the prevention of crime. It had been formerly the opinion, that human life should be only forfeited in cases where murder had been committed; but this was a mere quibble, and as if the lex talionis was to be the principle of the law, nothing could be more absurd or apart from the object of punishment than this. Government possessed its power of punishment, not for the purpose of retaliation, but to prevent future crime, and establish both a warning and an example. It was not on this principle that abolition of the capital punishment for forgery took place, but because of men's minds being so set against it that no convictions ever took place. The same objection to capital punishment did not exist in the instances of rape and arson, they being somewhat of the nature of murder, inasmuch as they might involve that crime in the attempt. Prove that a man enters the chamber of a woman at midnight, and, with a pistol to her head, compels her to give up her casket, in such case a verdict would be sure to be obtained. But there should be certain limits; and in cases where the punishment was so severe as to preclude the obtaining of a verdict, there they should pause, and inquire whether a milder punishment could, with propriety, be substituted. The less punishment there was, the better for society, and what should of necessity exist, ought not to be vindictive, but such as was calculated to give effect to the laws. Some valuable information had been procured with regard to the management of penitentiaries in America, and on these an experiment was about to be tried at Dartmoor. An Irish Prelate, for whom he entertained the highest respect, had added some information on the subject, but though he (the Lord Chancellor) agreed generally in the remarks of the right reverend Prelate, still there was one point on which he differed from him, and that was, the total disapproval of the punishment of transportation. It was not to be denied, that transportation oftentimes proved ineffective, though its inefficiency as a punishment
624
had been greatly exaggerated. It had this inconvenience, that it was too much under the control of circumstances, which, in the instance of persons committing the same crime, made it to one very light, whilst it was to the other very severe. Its efficacy as a general punishment certainly admitted of a doubt, but to say, that in no case it was of effect, would be to say too much. The best system of punishment was that which afforded the greatest variety, proportionate to each crime, and divisible in the degree of criminality. If transportation were rendered as effective as it could be rendered, and the measure of punishment warily meted out, a great improvement might take place. In the first place, the practice of giving leave tickets should either be abolished or very cautiously exercised, nor should the Governor be permitted to let off those who for eight or ten months, put on a face of pretended reformation. The punishment of transportation could be rendered more or less severe, by putting some of the convicts totally apart from others, throwing them into perfect oblivion, shutting them out from Europe and European communication, even to their very names, and thus teaching them to find,—"Even in the lowest deep a lower depth." There then could be another colony restricted also, but in a less degree than the other, and through this the account would be propagated here. Such an arrangement would soon be made known, and cure persons of the desire of going to New South Wales. Other arrangements could be made as regarded the degree of restriction during the voyage, which could be rendered equally effective. Then, besides transportation, there could be superadded a preliminary punishment to hard labour for one, two, three, or twelve months, or with the addition of solitary confinement in cases of an extreme nature. Having said thus much, he hoped his noble friend would reconsider the propriety of urging forward this proposition now. The subject could be well considered during the vacation, when the details would be closely attended to, and steps were already taken by a nobleman who possessed great practical knowledge on the subject, to make such preparation as the important nature of the measure required.
Lord Suffieldadmitted, that a great improvement in prison discipline had taken place, but he did not think that the im-

625
provement could be said to follow from classification. He thought that the system of inspection would be found to have effected more for this purpose. Indeed, there was no guide to assist them in the mode of classification; and after making two or three broad distinctions which it was impossible to overlook, he conceived it would be better to commit the rest to the Magistrates, Chaplains, and other officers, who were acquainted with the characters and circumstances of the prisoners. From the manner in which our prisons were constructed there were none where the system of classification could be carried into effect with any chance or likelihood of success; and in many places the crowded state of the prisons would of necessity preclude the attempt. He was of opinion, that the dislike to capital punishments, as well as their inefficacy, would render it desirable that the subject of secondary punishments should be taken at once into consideration, and something be resolved upon. It could not be denied that, in consequence of the alterations which had already been made in this respect, much good had ensued, for prosecutions had been instituted, and convictions obtained, which would not otherwise have taken place. The consequence of that was, what all noble Lords desired, namely, an increased certainty of punishment for offences. The suggestion of the noble Lord to appoint inspectors of prisons had his approbation. With regard to corporal punishment, he did not look upon it as calculated to effect any good. Even amongst the lower animals it was found to be unproductive of advantage, and it could not be expected to operate beneficially upon rational creatures. The noble Lord alluded to two systems which prevailed in America, that of Aubrey and that of Philadelphia, and he very properly gave the preference to the latter, of which corporal punishment did not form a part.
The Duke of Richmondagreed in the observations made by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, and hoped another Session would not pass without setting the question at rest. With regard to certain juvenile offences, he would wish to see the Magistrates assisted by a Jury, as he thought there was too much power vested in the hands of the former. In many instances the law operated here most injuriously. It frequently occurred that a boy for some trifling offence had
626
been lying in prison for a month, and when brought before a Magistrate it was considered that a fortnight would have been quite enough of punishment for the offence, and consequently the boy was sentenced to perhaps but one day additional. When the boy went back to his village, this strange conduct excited dislike of the law which confined a boy a month for an offence which a Magistrate thought punished by a day's imprisonment. He knew many Magistrates who, on this account, would rather overlook than call to account slight offenders. But with regard to corporal punishments, he was not so opposed to them as the noble Lord near him. Suppose the case of a minor offence committed by a boy of eleven years of age. How would they treat him? Why, for his own part, he would treat him as he would his own son whom he had sent to Westminster School. His noble friend, however, must not designate such punishment as he referred to, "corporal punishment." He did not see any reason why, if his boy was flogged, flogging should not be inflicted on the son of a labourer. He thought a smart flogging would be much preferable to the confinement and contamination of a gaol. Before he sat down he would suggest to his noble friend to lose no time in endeavouring to ascertain whether the rural police were efficient. He much doubted whether a beadle walking about a district, as they were sometimes seen, were the people on whom they ought to rely for the suppression of offences. He concurred entirely with those who were of opinion, that there was no course better calculated for the suppression of crime than that of making its detection and punishment as nearly certain as possible. As regarded the increase of crime, he feared they might be led into error if they founded their calculations on the increase that had taken place in the number of the prosecutions; he feared it would appear, when the report of the county-rate Committee was laid before the House, that the alterations which had been made in the law, giving parties their expenses, had to some extent operated as an inducement to persons to prosecute.
The Marquess of Lansdownrose chiefly to confirm a statement made by his noble and learned friend on the Woolsack as to one important fact. He alluded to the degree of improvement of which our pri-

627
son discipline was susceptible, by enforcing a system of work combined with silence. For a period of fourteen months the experiment of labour and silence had been tried in the house of correction in the county (Wilts) in which he resided; and he was enabled to state, from some very correct information he had received on the subject, that the silence as well as the labour had been practically enforced, and that the system had tended as well to improve the conduct of the prisoners as to their corporal welfare. The advantages were confirmed by the fact, that double the number of crimes were committed during a period when some of the tread-mills only could be in operation and silence enforced, in those quarters of the prison where it could not be enforced. With respect to the effect of education, he believed it had not answered all the expectations of sanguine minds, but he could not go the length of saying, that it ought to be abandoned. He had ascertained, that the average of education in those country places in which rioting had taken place, was much below the average of education in the towns in the same neighbourhood. Even under the influence of the great counteracting causes to which his noble friend had alluded, and in the investigation of which Parliament was now engaged—notwithstanding this, he believed it would be found, that, since education had been extended, crimes of violence had diminished. In calculating to ascertain the state of crime, they ought always to distinguish between those crimes that were, and those that were not of a violent character. Comparing those parts of France in which the people were well educated with some of the departments into which education had not yet penetrated, it was ascertained, that where education was most prevalent, crimes of violence were fewer in proportion to the number of the people. It had been endeavoured to establish the contrary proposition by referring to the northern and southern states of America; but to found any calculation on the comparatively small number of convictions in the southern states, was to commit a great mistake, because it should be borne in mind, that slavery existing there to a considerable extent, masters took the task of punishment into their own hands, and thus there were a number of cases which, under other circumstances, would have made
628
their appearance in a court of law, of which they could find no public record. He would not now go further into the subject, except to say, that though he admitted education had not answered the wishes of its best friends, yet it had produced so much good, that he could not abandon the hope, that it would be hereafter greatly beneficial. Of course, that alone was not sufficient; and among other auxiliaries a uniform and well-devised system of punishment was one of the objects which deserved the first consideration. The whole subject was of sufficient importance to demand the best attention of every member of his Majesty's Government, and he trusted that the result would be, to devise some means of effectually checking that appalling increase of crime which constituted one of the existing calamities of this country.
Lord Denmansaid, he should detain their Lordships with only a few observations. Having spoken to the learned Judges with regard to the proposition of their having the power of making, when on circuit, the regulation for the prisons of the country, he would take that opportunity of stating, that their opinion was, that their habits and opportunities of information by no means peculiarly qualified them to make such regulations as were likely to be effectual. This was a very momentous question, and he had always deeply felt its importance; but he also felt, that the peculiar situation of a Judge did not give him the opportunity of much acquaintance with the matter of prison discipline. He thought it must be clear that a Judge, in passing sentences in Courts of Justice—though he might calculate their effect on the by-standers—though he might calculate their effect on the prisoners, yet he could not judge of their effect in the prison, nor determine what regulations ought to have existence there. He thought it far better that this duty should be discharged by the country Magistrates, of whose competence there were so many distinguished examples in that House, and whose valuable assistance to the Secretary of State for the Home Department had been productive of very considerable improvements. He quite agreed with those who entertained the opinion, that they were not quite qualified to judge of the moral condition of the country from any statistical statements that they had been able to procure. He doubted whether,

629
really and truly, crime had increased to that alarming extent that had been stated. He was aware, that the increase was peculiarly great in the number of prosecutions; but he was also aware, that this increase did not furnish by any means a perfect measure of the increase of crime. From whatever cause, it was a fact, that prosecutions had increased in proportion to the crimes committed. No doubt the motives of the parties who had promoted these prosecutions were most laudable; he would not throw out anything in discouragement of the vigilance of the public officers; but at the same time no delicacy ought to prevent them from asserting the truth, and informing the public of the fact. This it was their duty to do, so that at least the matter might be made the subject of inquiry, it being of very great importance to ascertain whether the increase in the number of prosecutions did not rather mark a desire to obtain the costs and food for a number of unquestionably very excellent individuals, who lived by prosecutions, than any increase, as was very generally apprehended, of crime. This was a subject of the most pressing necessity. He went along with his noble and learned friend in his opinions as to the effects of the Poor-laws, and in his approval of the abolition of those hateful severities by which the Criminal Laws had at one time been rendered a subject of general reproach. One effect, however, of the laws themselves, and directly bearing on the subject, was the tendency to multiply crime, which was chargeable against the system of throwing into our prisons, filled with indiscriminate company, youthful offenders. They thus herded with the worst of characters, and in such a school for crime they must be of poor ability indeed, if they did not become proficient. They thus lost all chance of obtaining an honest living at any future period of their lives; there was an end of all hope of their being able to occupy a fair and creditable position in the world. He congratulated their Lordships on a Bill having come up from the Commons, the object of which was to prevent persons who were committed in boroughs from being sent to distant Assizes for trial; by this Bill they were to be tried at the first Quarter Session that would be held after their commitment. They would then avoid the great evil which was sometimes seen of youths remaining in prison a long
630
time before trial, the charge against them being, that they had stolen an apple or a bunch of grapes, or committed some other such trivial offence. If they were acquitted, the Judge would perhaps feel called on to express his indignation at such a prosecution having been instituted; if they were found guilty, the sentence was light, and thus the law was brought into contempt. Much good would unquestionably result from limiting, as much as possible, the chances of a criminal's escape. Give him a fair trial, but let him have as few chances as possible of evading the penalties of the law by availing himself, as was too often seen, of its technicalities. Another improvement that ought to be made was, instead of taking prisoners twenty, thirty, or even sixty miles, as was occasionally done, to be tried, to have some means of bringing them to justice on the spot. The enormous increase of crime complained of, even if it did go along with the increase in the population, must be diminished. On the subject of secondary punishments, he would observe, that he really thought, that there was much misconception out of doors as to the feeling with which offenders contemplated transportation. One impudent fellow, on being sentenced, might say, "My Lord, I am much obliged to you;" and another might remark, "Botany Bay is an earthly paradise, and I have some friends and relations there whom I shall be glad to see;" but, in his judgment, no importance ought to be attached to such occurrences. Persons who formed their opinions from ebullitions like these, fell into the error of taking for their guide the exception instead of the general rule. His own observation assured him, that transportation was considered a great punishment. Whatever the individual's habits of crime, he did not see how it could be otherwise to him than a severe infliction. Such a person, offender though he was, must have the common feelings of his nature. He was a man, and it must wound him deeply to be deprived of his home, to be sent to a distant place in which it was denied to him to see the face of his relatives or friends again. It sometimes happened, that clerks who had defrauded their employers, were the objects of this punishment. They were persons who were generally respectably brought up and connected; and could it be supposed that the dread of transportation had

631
never acted beneficially, by deterring any individuals of that class from the commission of offences that would subject them to banishment from their country? In considering this important and extensive subject, the principle of restitution ought not to be lost sight of as it was at present by the laws of England. Unless the thief was found with the purse he had stolen in his possession, the party robbed recovered nothing. He had heard of cases in which persons who had been convicted of robbery and transported, had taken with them the produce of their spoil, amounting to large sums, in one case to 5,000 l., and had invested it in the purchase of an estate. Such instances were calculated to alarm bankers; but he did not see why the offender who was convicted and transported, should not be considered in the same situation as the debtor of the party he had plundered. With regard to our colonies, at all events, he could not see any difficulty in keeping a constant liability to execution hanging over the offender's head, just as if judgment had been entered up against him for debt in Westminster Hall. In conclusion, he must express his warm approbation of the interest the subject was exciting with their Lordships. It appeared to him a disgrace to the national character, that more attention had not been paid to a matter on which the well-being of society so much depended. He admitted, that places of punishment ought not to be rendered more advantageous to persons who were immured in them for crime, than were the places from which they were taken; nor ought they to impose more severe suffering than was necessary for the suppression of crime.
Lord Wharncliffereplied. He was not generally favourable to corporal punishment; but, in his opinion, young offenders might with advantage be subjected to that description of castigation which was inflicted for misconduct at schools. The effect of abolishing flogging entirely in the army, he feared would be—that it being necessary, as a substitution for that punishment, to send the soldiers who committed offences to prison, they would be corrupted by the associates they found there, and be worse characters when their term of imprisonment terminated than they were when it commenced. This had been found to be the case to the extent to which the experiment had been, up to
632
this period, tried. In obedience to the wishes of his noble friends, he begged leave of their Lordships to withdraw his Motion.
Motion withdrawn.