CONVICTS—TICKETS OF LEAVE. (Hansard, 26 February 1856)

§ EARL GRANVILLE
said, that there was no objection to grant the Returns moved for; but he begged to inform the noble Viscount that similar returns had been already ordered to be laid before the other House of Parliament.

VISCOUNT DUNGANNON
said, that those Returns would answer his purpose. He would now ask the question of which he had given notice on the subject—whether it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to continue giving tickets of leave to convicts? He believed it was a well-known fact that a very considerable proportion of these persons had, since their liberation, returned to their former course of crime, and it was shown by proceedings at quarter sessions and elsewhere, that throughout the country cases of the most atrocious character had been participated in by them. It seemed to him that the ticket-of-leave system, so far from having been attended with any good result, had proved most mischievous in its tendency and productive of serious evils. He could not, therefore, forbear from asking what were the intentions of the Government wishing it, at the same time to be understood that, should the answer he received 1402 be unsatisfactory, it was his intention, after the production of the returns which had been moved for in the other House of Parliament, to bring under the consideration of their Lordships some Resolution bearing upon the subject.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
said, it was not in the power of the Government to make any alteration in the ticket-of-leave system without an Act of Parliament, and he could only state that it was not at present their intention to bring in any Bill for that purpose.

VISCOUNT DUNGANNON
wished the answer he had just received had been of another character, for he felt assured that the system, as it now existed, tended largely to the increase of crime, and crime, too, of the worst possible description. Throughout the country he believed the system was universally condemned, and he hoped that for the good of society some attempt would be made to remedy the evil.

THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
said, it was quite in the power of the Government to effect such alterations in the system as to cure the evil complained of. He was surprised to hear the noble Earl (Earl Granville) say, that it would be necessary to have an Act of Parliament to alter the system. It was in the power of Government to diminish the evil, by placing these persons under the surveillance of the police, and no Act of Parliament was required to enable them to do that. The present system was causing great mischief in the country. The regulations of the system were in the power of the Government, and they were responsible for its operation. As chairman of quarter sessions, he could bear personal testimony to the evil consequences of the system at present pursued.

§ THE EARL OF HARROWBY
said, that necessarily, if no transportation was allowed, criminals, after a certain period of imprisonment, must be turned out again upon the country. And if they were detained until their sentences had expired, they would be released without any surveillance at all. It might be a question, whether they were not let loose upon society too soon; but it could hardly be said that they would be likely to do less mischief without what was called a ticket of leave, than they did now in spite of this precaution. He did not sec how, if transportation were no longer possible, the evils attending the necessary release of criminals in this country when their sentences expired, could be 1403 chargeable altogether upon the ticket-of-leave system. The whole question, however, was a most difficult one, and if any suggestions could be offered involving a practical improvement upon the present mode of proceeding, he was sure they would be gladly received and acted upon by the Secretary of State for the Home Department.

§ THE EARL Of MALMESBURY
considered the speech of the noble Earl (Earl of Harrowby) to be one of the most alarming he had ever heard in his life. The noble Earl declared it was perfectly impossible to retrace our steps with regard to transportation.

§ THE EARL OF HARROWBY
No; I merely said, that a great portion of the evils attributed to the present system arose from the fact that, having abolished transportation, our criminals must, sooner or later, be turned upon the country.

§ THE EARL OF MALMESBURY
said, he understood the argument of the noble Earl to lead to this conclusion, that we could not return to the system of transportation. He utterly dissented from that. We were at present in a period of trial and experiment. We were trying to see if the system of transportation could be dispensed with; and it remained to be seen whether the substituted system would succeed. It might be that its evils might be remedied without abolishing it; or other means of punishment might possibly be within our reach. But he hoped that it would not be taken for granted that expatriation as a punishment was impossible. At present the degree of apprehension entertained throughout the country as to the operation of the ticket-of-leave system was very great. It was not only timid persons who partook in this apprehension, but really experienced and well-informed people in responsible positions were beginning to be alarmed. In his own county (Hampshire) this year a proposition had been made by a very able chairman of quarter sessions, Sir W. Heathcote, for the addition of seventy constables to the county police force. Now, as the rates in Hampshire were double what they were ten years ago, the proposition was not at all a pleasant one, and it was opposed by himself and others; but they wore compelled to yield to the force of reasoning, by which their chairman showed that the great increase of crime owing to the number of convicts returned under the tickets of leave, and who were hovering on the 1404 borders of Berkshire (where there was no rural police), rendered absolutely necessary such an increase of the police force. This was not the period for the abolition of transportation. If experience should warrant us in dispensing with it, well and good; but the Government must not consider the present system as established for ever; and he would venture to add, that if it be possible we must return to a system of transportation.

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL
said, the Government did not mean to say that we could not return to transportation, but certainly we could not return to the system of transportation which had been departed from, and send convicts to colonies which had already refused to receive them, unless, at all events, they altered their minds, which they were not likely to do. If any new system of transportation was adopted, it must be to new territories which had not the advantages of our older colonies. He feared that the present system, which was merely experimental, could not be permanent, and then no doubt it would be necessary to consider how a new system of transportation could be carried into effect.

LORD CAMPBELL
said, he hoped the present system was not fixed, and that there was no irrevocable determination to abandon transportation. It was quite true that prisoners at home must be set free at some time or other, and without any surveillance; and this rendered it most important, if we would avoid the monstrous calamity of having London and our large towns filled with forcats, that we should return to some system of transportation. Undoubtedly, we could not force our convicts on the old colonies which had rejected them; but there might be in the Falkland Islands or elsewhere other settlements to which they might be sent; not, however, with the advantages belonging to the older colonies, where there was a population to absorb the discharged convicts, and where they could renew their character; as above 40,000 of them had done in Australia, where they were now earning their livelihood honestly. He hoped that ere long the Government would earnestly endeavour to restore some system of transportation.

§ THE EARL OF ST. GERMANS
said, the subject was much too important to be discussed incidentally. But he believed that any future system of transportation must be based upon a principle perfectly 1405 different from that which had formerly been in operation. We must reflect with horror upon the dreadful abuses of the old system, which was quite useless for punishment or reformation. The colonies were right in pressing for its abolition. The prædial system was so uncertain, that if a convict happened to fall to the lot of a kind master, he was scarcely in a state of punishment at all; whereas, on the other hand, if a different fate befell him the horrors of Norfolk Island might have been realised—horrors which it was impossible for him farther to advert to, so fearful were the crimes which had been committed—such were the horrors which had been disclosed in the evidence taken before the Committees which had sat upon the subject. He hoped that some noble Lord would ere long give notice of bringing the subject forward, that it might be properly considered.

§ LORD MONTEAGLE
hoped that the House would not finally decide on this most important question on the evidence which was taken before the Committees referred to by the noble Earl, because it was partial, limited, and one-sided. He would never force the colonies to accept convicts; but if the question were properly and discreetly managed, he thought the colonies would accept convicts for their own advantage. The colony of Western Australia accepted convict labour from this country, and the colony of Moreton Bay petitioned to have the same advantage as the people of Western Australia. The objection to the reception of convict labour did not come from those places, but from the other colonies. He admitted that if the principle of transportation were taken up again, it should be taken up on the ground of its being beneficial to the colonies, and not on the ground of economy to this country, or the necessity of getting rid of our criminal population. He did not believe they could ever revert to the system of Norfolk Island, which formed a dark page in the history of this country. The question of transportation had been decided against the best feelings of the Legislature, and against the wishes and experience of the colonies. If they had been properly dealt with, with due management he thought a time might come when those who rejected transportation would be least disposed to resist it, if resumed under proper regulations.