rose to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice on a former day, for a regular production, on the commencement of each session of parliament, of Accounts, shewing the expenditure of the grants of the preceding year, so far as the same could be made up, and to the production of which he hoped there would be no objection. He said the enormous taxes annually levied upon the people of England for the exigencies of the state, and which they bore with the greatest cheerfulness, under the persuasion that those burdens were indispensable to the occasions of the country, notwithstanding the late disastrous failures of our continental expeditions, imposed a duty on the House to see that the produce of those taxes were applied with rigid economy to the purposes for which they were voted. The heads of public expenditure, to which he desired the House to look with vigilance, were those of the Army and Navy, by a due attention to which he was confident that hundreds of thousands of pounds might be annually saved. As to the expenditure under the head of Civil Offices, he had no fault to find with the payments made to those upon whom any public duty was imposed; for he was persuaded that, from the highest office down to that of the lowest exciseman, the payment was too small for the maintenance of the officers in proportion to their stations in life. The only alteration he would desire on this head was, that the high pay and emoluments should be diminished to those who held sinecure places doing nothing; and given to those who executed the public business. The precedents on which he grounded his motion, he found on the records of the Irish parliament, where such an arrangement was justly deemed necessary; and he concluded by moving a Resolution to the same effect.

said, that as the hon. baronet had taken for a precedent the practice of the Irish parliament, he thought it necessary to say a few words on the subject. It was the custom in that parliament to make up their accounts annually, and so far as in them lay they did so, but from September to January, and even February, it was found almost impossible to do so with any degree of accuracy; and if in that country, where things were carried on upon so small a scale, the difficulty was so great, what must it be in such very complex and multifarious accounts as those which were required in the various and numerous departments of this government? In fact, he was certain it would be impossible to comply with the tenor of the hon. baronet's Resolution, and he should therefore oppose it.

spoke in favour of the Resolution. He said the several reports of those committees of finance, of which the Speaker had been the chairman, all went to recommend the plan of the House refusing to grant a supply till an account was produced, so far as it could be made up, of the expenditure of the public money, granted by the House in the pre- ceding session. He was convinced it was owing to the neglect of the plan, that the House had been drawn into the expenditure of 100 millions at least more than they would have done had the plan recommended been then adopted. He was sure he could prove this, and he thought it was high time the House should interfere and put some stop to so prodigal an expenditure, as that which had so long been suffered to be pursued.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer and Mr. Rose opposed the motion on account of the impossibility there would be to comply with it. The accounts were every year laid before parliament, so far as they could be made out, and if any honourable member thought there was any article that was not sufficiently made out, he might move for an explanation, or for a more detailed account, and he was certain to obtain what he required, and he might then, if not satisfied, bring the matter in any shape he pleased before the House.—Sir T. Turton said a few words in reply, after which a division took place: Ayes 29; Noes 66; Majority 38.

addressed the House on the subject of the Petition presented by certain freeholders of Gloucester, respecting lord Dursley. He asked the hon. member who had presented it, whether he knew the freeholders who signed it, or any of them, how the petition came into his hands, and whether he intended to take any step upon it?

replied, that he knew none of the freeholders—that he had no particular connection with the county of Gloucester, and he believed that he had been applied to on that very account to present this petition; those more immediately connected with the county having refused to take it up, lest their conduct should be attributed to personal motives. He also stated, that he had apprised several members of the petition before it was presented—that he had taken steps to apprise the family of it, and particularly that he had mentioned the circumstance to a noble lord, a near connection of the family, and asked him whether he had heard of it?—To which the noble lord replied, that he had, and advised him not to present it. Mr. Serjeant Best, one of the most eminent men at the bar, had also read it, and said that it was not a petition that ought to be presented. When he found that it did not come under the Grenville Act, he certainly was under considerable difficulty how to proceed. He had undertaken, however, to present it.—He next adverted to what had fallen from the India Judge on the other side (sir John Anstruther), on a former night, who had entered into some sophistical reasonings, which he did not well understand, although he had collected the conclusion to be, that he ought not to have presented the petition. It would be remembered, however, that he had carefully stated that he did not consider himself answerable for the allegations contained in it, nor pledged to take any step upon it. In presenting it he conceived he had merely done his duty.

then rose and observed, that to prevent any possible misconstruction or misrepresentation of the few words he had to offer, he had committed them to paper. He then read from the paper, that he was authorised by his father, earl Berkeley, positively to assert that he was his eldest son and heir apparent. He might have avoided this by producing a landed qualification which he possessed; but he felt himself so strong on the title of his birth that he had not chosen to resort to it. He would not detain the House further from proceeding according to its discretion.—His lordship then withdrew.

said, that he had himself presented petitions when other members refused, upon their being put into his hands by the parties. He asked, whether he was to understand that the petitioners, or any one of them, had given the petition into the hands of the hon. member who had presented it?

replied, that the petition had been put into his hands by a freeholder, of extensive property in Gloucestershire, but not by any of those who had signed it.

thought it irregular to ask questions in this manner.

contended that it was perfectly regular to ask who had signed the petition, and whether the member presenting it knew the persons; otherwise, the grossest frauds might be committed upon the House. As the hon. member had confessed he did not know who they were who had signed this petition, and that none of them had given it into his hands, he wished to have the Speaker's opinion, whether they could regularly proceed farther upon it.

said that the House re- quired of the members presenting petitions, that they should be able to say that they believed the signatures to be authentic; but it had not been the practice to require absolute certainty on that point, a practice which would have been attended with great inconvenience. God forbid, that the subjects of this country should be unable to have petitions presented, unless they came from the most distant parts of the kingdom to give it into the hands of members find prove their hand writing.

adverted to what had been said of his sophistry, and observed, that the whole of the sophistry consisted in this, that he had desired the hon. member to state what steps he intended to take upon this petition. The hon. member had then replied, that he believed his course would be to move for a new writ. Did he now mean to say that he was ready to follow up this proceeding by moving for a new writ?

replied, that he had already stated that he did not know the freeholders who had signed the petition, and could not be responsible for the allegations.

The question that the debate be resumed, was then put and carried.—Upon the question that the Petition lie on the table,

asked the hon. member whether he was at all prepared to support the allegations it contained?

replied, that he had so often answered that question, that he was surprized it should again be put to him. He had stated that he did not know those who had signed it, that he was not prepared to support the allegations. He had only done his duty in putting the House in possession of the Petition, and the House might deal with it as it thought proper.

then observed, that if the hon. member, or any other member had been prepared to support the allegations contained in the Petition, it would be proper that it should lie on the table; but if not, then he thought it ought not to be received. The allegation was, that a person sat in that House who was not a member; and was it fitting that such a petition should remain on the table without any proceeding had upon it? The hon. member had said that the House might proceed upon it as it pleased; but what could the House do? The House, he presumed, would not advertise for evidence on the question; and, unless some immediate step was to be taken upon it, he could not see how the Petition could with propriety be received. Gentlemen, he allowed, ought to make no difficulty in presenting petitions; but if petitioners gave their petitions into the hands of members without enabling them to take any steps upon them, they could not complain if such petitions were rejected. This observation applied very strongly to this case, where the noble lord, for so he would still call him, notwithstanding these unsupported allegations (Hear, hear!)—had acted upon the assertion of his father, to which he was bound to pay every possible deference. The noble lord had been introduced to society as the heir apparent of his father, and had been received by his sovereign as such. Under such circumstances, he could not have resorted to his qualification without a stain upon himself and his family; he could not have acted otherwise than he had done. There was nothing personal attributed to the noble lord. This petition had been presented without any instructions to the hon. member how to act upon it, as if it had no other object than to excite domestic rivalship and animosity; as if it had been the design to have it laid on the table to be taken up at any distance of time, no one undertaking at present to substantiate the facts contained in it. Would the House then suffer this petition to lie on its table, to be held out in terrorem, and for no other purpose than exciting uneasiness, and producing animosity in breasts where the fondest affection existed?—If the House were to receive this petition it would be hereafter in the power of malignity to poison conjugal happiness, and to plant thorns in the hearts of the innocent, by making the proceedings of this House a vehicle to publish its libels. The House must see the mischief of this measure; it was a case without example; respecting it no party spirit could exist, and he trusted for its rejection in the generous feelings of the right hon. gent. opposite.

said, that the petition was framed with considerable attention to its not being obnoxious. If no other member suggested it, he felt it to be his duty, to move that the petition should be referred to a committee of privileges.

wished to know from the learned gent. whether he would undertake that the petitioners (supposing the House received their petition) would proceed.

would give no pledge. He had learnt from the counsel employed, that it would be necessary to apply for the Speaker's warrant, to enforce the attendance of witnesses to prove the documentary evidence referred to in the petition.

expressed himself dissatisfied, and without authority from the noble family of Berkeley for so doing, declared his intention of moving for the rejection, of the petition.

conceived, that all the House could desire, was, that the party petitioning should make good the allegations. The assurance of his learned friend, therefore, in his opinion was sufficient.

regretted that the question should have come before the House, but being before the House, his opinion was, that it was cognizable under the Grenville act.

was of the contrary opinion. He thought before the petition was laid on the table, the House ought to be informed whether any hon. member was prepared to prove the allegation; viz. that the noble lord is not the legitimate son of earl Berkeley. If not, then he should object to it being laid on the table.

thought the electors should have raised the objection at the election. It was competent, however, for them to object to the qualification, and he should be for doing justice.

wished the hon. gent. who presented the petition, had asked the petitioners whether they were or not prepared to prove their case. He regretted the extreme cruelty and scandal which must necessarily follow the agitation of the subject; but on the whole he thought it impossible for the House to refuse going into the inquiry.

should have been against receiving the petition, but for the statement of the learned gent. (Mr. Kenrick), that counsel and witnesses were ready to attend. He thought the business, however, highly cruel, and that the petition could answer no good purpose.

said, if the House wished to dispose of the petition as speedily as possible they would send it at once to a committee. If they were to order it to lie on the table that would have the effect of disposing of it for that day.

could not see any possible ground for refusing the petition. It was in terms of law, and its prayer and language were respectful. If it was to be gone into and prosecuted, were there not questions which they were to inquire into before-hand? If, in the result, it should not be supported by proof, that was an insult which it would behove the House to punish, and not to suffer the petitioners to escape its just vengeance. He concluded by moving that the petition be referred to a committee of privileges.

said, he had never met with a question in which he had experienced more difficulty in making up his mind. He might indeed, now feel his difficulties revived, from perceiving that his hon. and learned friend who spoke last, and the hon. gent. opposite who spoke before him (Mr. Wynn) differed from him in opinion. The question, however, seemed to him, with all deference, to be—Were they, from respect to the petitioners, to enter into a proceeding which they knew could not in the result be satisfactory? If the investigation which might take place should terminate favourably to the claims of the noble lord, against whom the application was made, their decision in his favour could be to him of no service. If, on the contrary, they should be of opinion against him, such a declaration would go to prejudice his rights. Was that House to proceed to the trial of a question over which they had no jurisdiction, and which must afterwards come before a competent tribunal? And were they to try in the most unsatisfactory manner, what must be again satisfactorily and legally investigated? There might be a necessity for this, if it could be alledged that the other party's rights would be injured if the House did not interfere; but here there was no such pretence. The petitioners said they were ready to make out their case; but even if they did make out all they alledged, it would not, to his mind, be conclusive, but would only go to raise strong inferences, which there might be facts sufficiently strong to do away. But after all, of what did they complain? That the noble lord was seated instead of the person of their choice? No—that he was not a proper person to represent the county? No—but that an individual held a seat in that House under the name by which they had always known him. If they had had doubts on their minds they might have brought the question to trial in a fair way. What, however, was the question now? Not one relating to the electors, but to the person who was to sit in that House. They complained not that their choice had been circumscribed, but that the legislature had not acted up sufficiently to their own circumscription. The choice of the petitioners must be presumed to be concluded in the general choice of the electors, and the present application was more properly a suggestion to the House calling on them for an exercise of their discretion than any thing else. He objected to the idea of throwing such an onus on the House, and as one party would be prejudiced by their entertaining the petition, while no practical good effects could be produced by the investigation, he was against the motion.

said, if this was a question of discretion he should agree with his right hon. friend. So much the contrary, however, this was a petition under a statute, and he could not see on what ground the House could refuse to act on it. The petitioners were freeholders who complained of the sitting member being disqualified, and this was a case which they were entitled to bring before the House. He thought the case must go to a committee of privileges to ascertain the fact. As to this being a question of party feeling against the noble lord, it was impossible to conceive so. All feeling must operate the other way.

Upon a division, the numbers were, For the motion 46; Against it 91; Majority 45. The petition was consequently rejected.

complained that the Fifteenth Report of the commissioners of naval revision had not been laid before the House. The Report to which he alluded set forth the necessity of establishing a new Naval Arsenal at Northfleet. It appeared that our harbours at Portsmouth and Plymouth were on the decline, having less depth of water than formerly, so that ships coming in to be repaired, were obliged to have their guns and stores taken out before they could enter. Similar inconveniencies were experienced at Deptford and at Woolwich, so that ships of the line were obliged to drop down to Long Reach, or Northfleet to be fitted out for sea. These circumstances rendered the establishment of a new Naval Arsenal necessary. The immense expences incurred in consequence of the evils he had described were sufficient to answer any objection that might be made to the expence attending the establishment of a new Naval Arsenal, however great it might be. In the event of a peace, such an establishment would be necessary, as room would be wanting to lay up 130 sail of the line, and upwards of 400 other vessels of war. This was proposed in the Report, as a remedy for the evils complained of, and Northfleet was named as having a greater depth of water than either of our docks at Portsmouth, at Plymouth, at Deptford, or at Woolwich. He thought the Report ought to be laid upon their table, and concluded by moving "An humble Address to his Majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to direct that the Fifteenth Report of the commissioners of naval revision, and the Report sent in to the board of admiralty, dated Oct. 18, 1807, and signed J. Rennie and J. Whidby, relating to mooring chains, be laid before that House."

observed that the present naval exertions had out grown all former systems; and it would, therefore, be proper to make some new arrangement to meet the inconvenience thence arising. It was, however, the first duty of government to look well into all the circumstances and bearings of the case, before they expended 10,000,000l. in forming the proposed new Arsenal at Northfleet. The House could not at present enter fully into the question with prudence, but he hoped government, at a period not very distant, would be able to grant the information required, or give satisfactory reasons for withholding it. He should oppose the motion, as the Report could not be produced at present without much inconvenience to the public service.

did not think it at all unsafe for the Report to lie on the table. If the measure was thought of some years ago, it was still more necessary from the present aspect of affairs to put it into effect. With respect to the calculation, lord Barham's authority was sufficient. He did not approve of the production of the papers, and hoped that ere long something effectual would be adopted.

approved of the authorities cited by the hon. gent., to which he wished to add that of lord Vincent, who thought there was an absolute necessity of fortifications and armaments eastward of Spithead. The dock-yards, instead of declining, were in a constant state of improvement. In the harbour of Portsmouth there was no want of deep water. He alluded to his publication on the depth of the Thames, in which the most skilled and experienced judges concurred. The idea of manufacturing sail cloth in the yards, he deemed to be totally misconceived. He never asserted that there should be no Arsenal at Northfleet, he merely deemed strict inquiry necessary into the extent of such a work.

wished the hon. gent. would not at present press his motion. He agreed with his several statements. The question has been already before the privy council, but in consequence of the great expence necessary, no decision had been come to.

stated, that almost every noble lord who has been at the head of the admiralty, had left a memorandum of the importance of this measure. It should not be postponed, inasmuch as it concerned the independence of the kingdom.

observed, that the delay did not arise from any unwillingness, but front its great importance, and the wish to avoid bringing it out piece-meal.

The question was then put, and negatived.

, in rising to make his promised motion, touching the acts of the 19th and the 34th of the King, relative to the Penitentiary Houses, said, he should not go over the grounds at any great length, upon which he thought this measure ought to be adopted, and which he had fully stated not long ago, when he made the motion which he was now about to submit to the House. I will just state, said he, that the object of this motion is to carry into execution a plan for rendering the administration of the laws more effectual, which held out a better prospect of reforming criminals, and of attaining all the other objects of all penal laws, than any that has hitherto been found practicable. It is a plan which was formed by some of the wisest men in this country, and who had devoted much of their valuable time to this important subject—by Mr. Justice Blackstone, Mr. Howard, and Mr. Eden, now Lord Auckland. The great objects which they proposed to themselves were, to reform the criminals, to seclude them from their former associates, to separate those of whom hopes might be entertained from those who were desperate, to teach them useful trades, to accustom them to habits of industry, to give them religious instruction, and to provide them with a recommendation to the world, and the means of obtaining an honest livelihood after the expiration of the term of their punishment. In the opinion of Mr. Justice Blackstone, it was a system which united in itself so many advantages, and held but so flattering a prospect of success, that he did not hesitate to declare that, "if properly executed, there was reason to hope that such a reformation might be effected in the lower classes of mankind, and such a gradual scale of punishment he affixed to all gradations of guilt, as might in time supersede the necessity of capital punishments, except for very atrocious crimes." (Com. 11 edit. vol. iv. p. 371.) That plan, however, has remained on the statute book for upwards of 30 years, without any effectual step having been taken to carry it into execution. In the mean time the want of it has been severely felt, and all have confessed that the inconvenience and inefficacy of other punishments have rendered but too sensible the impolitic and injurious tendency of the present system. There are, indeed, but three species of punishment which by the law of this country can be afflicted for crimes above the description of misdemeanors, and which are yet not punishable with death—that of imprisonment in gaols or houses of correction; imprisonment on board the hulks; or transportation. With respect to imprisonment it has been found, that in general persons who have been confined in common gaols return to society much worse than when they were first withdrawn from it; that men who were imprisoned for their first offence, became in a short space of time hardened and desperate, and qualified to commit the most dangerous crimes; that they are matured in villainy, with a degree of rapidity which would be thought hardly possible in so short a period. To remedy this evil, expedients have been devised, but none have been executed. The prisons of this country yet remain a reproach to it. No one step has been taken to adopt a plan, by which the different classes and species of offenders might be separated from each other. Offenders of the very worst description are indiscriminately mingled with those whose first offence (and that, perhaps, a very slight one) had brought them into a situation, from which with a little care they might be reclaimed. Persons who have been committed on suspicion of an offence, whose guilt or innocence is yet matter of uncertainty, are compelled to associate with those whose crimes have been ascer- tained, and the danger and contagion of whose society and manners and example cannot be doubtful. Such is the general state of the prisons of this country, with a very few exceptions highly honourable to the counties in which they are to be found. The most remarkable of these are the prisons of Gloucestershire, under the care of sir George Paul, and the house of correction at Southwell, in Nottinghamshire. Amongst the prisons pre-eminent for the badness of their police and their regulations, I am sorry to be obliged to mention those of the metropolis. The prison of Newgate particularly seems to combine every defect of which a place of confinement is capable; and at the same time that we have erected a national monument to Mr. Howard, as a reward for his exertions to reform our prisons, the city of London leave, close to the statue we have raised, this gaol, as a monument of our disgrace and our inhumanity, and in which not one of the regulations which Howard recommended has been observed.

Imprisonment on board the hulks is still more pernicious, and productive of still greater evils, even than imprisonment in our common gaols. It seems not to be the duty of any responsible person to determine what description of offenders shall be sent on board these vessels. Convicts from remote parts of the country, and those who have long infested the streets of London; boys for their first offences, and long practised robbers and adepts in every species of crimes; those who are not intended to be removed to any other place of punishment, and such as are waiting only for an opportunity to transport them to Botany Bay, are all confounded together, and, in the intervals of their severe labours, encourage and instruct each other in crimes, and in the most odious vices. Mr. Howard has stated as the result of much observation and inquiry, that of the persons confined on board the hulks, those who came from the country generally died, in consequence of their confinement, and of the horror they felt at the examples and the scenes exhibited to them; and that those who came from great manufacturing towns generally became in a short time the most daring and dangerous of offenders. When this subject was last before the House the secretary of state told us, that lately a great reform had been effected on board the hulks, and that they were no longer liable to the objections formerly made to them; and this happy change he ascribed to the gentlemen under whose superintendence they are placed. I am sorry to say, that that representation does not agree with the accounts which I have received. I have no doubt that the reports which have been made to that gentleman by the persons he employs are perfectly conformable to the statements which he has made to the secretary of state; but has that gentleman, though I understand that he inspects the hulks himself, been at Portsmouth more than once within the last year? and if he has, is it or is it not true, that although the most vicious and depraved habits and examples prevail there, there are at this moment no less than 14 or 15 boys to be found amongst the prisoners? The truth is, that no attention will ever be able to correct the defects of this species of punishment. The mischief, as is truly stated by the Committee of which you were the chairman, in their report of 1797, is not so much in the mode of conducting the establishment, as in the establishment itself. The vices of it are inseparable from the system.

With respect to the punishment of transportation to New South Wales, I have so lately troubled the House, and at so much length upon it, that I should be inexcusable in trespassing long upon their patience now. In whatever light we consider it, as calculated to prevent crimes, whether by the terror which the example should inpire, or by the reformation of the individual punished, we shall find it extremely innefficacious. As an example, the effect of the punishment is removed to a distance from those on whom it is to operate. It is involved in the greatest uncertainty, and is considered very differently according to the sanguine or desponding disposition of those who reflect on it, or according to the more accurate or eroneous accounts of the colony which may happen to have reached them. The severity, indeed, or lenity of the punishment, depends not on the degree of guilt of the offender, but of his talents, and acquirements and qualifications, for the new state of things into which he is transported. Possessed of that knowledge and skill which happens here to be most in request, it matters little what has been his offence, he may chance soon to find himself relieved from all restraint, and in a situation which he never could have hoped to gain in his own country. I have been informed that in the transactions which immediately led to the revolution which has lately taken place there, an attorney, who here stood in the pillory, and was afterwards transported, a man who here would have been an outcast from all society, was confidentially advised with by those in authority, and enjoyed something very like the influence of an attorney-general, because he was well acquainted with legal forms.

To judge of the effects which are produced in the convicts in the way of reformation, one has but to read the history of the colony which has been published by Mr. Collins, a writer who is above all suspicion of exaggerating the evils he relates, for, in spite of the facts which in every page of his book pronounce the condemnation of the whole system, he is uniformly its panegyrist. The history which he has written is little more than a disgusting narrative of atrocious crimes and most severe and cruel punishments. It is indeed a subject of very melancholy, and to this House of very reproachful reflection, that such an experiment in criminal jurisprudence and colonial policy as that of transportation to New South Wales should have been tried, and we should have suffered now 24 years to elapse without examining or even inquiring into its success or its failure. An experiment more unpromising or bolder than that of founding a colony, which was to consist altogether of thieves and convicts, of the very refuse of society, of men habituated to idleness, and having no motive for wishing success to the colony they were founding, never was tried in any former age or by any other nation. When we formerly transported convicts to North America, they found themselves immediately on their arrival in a society, where habits of industry and regularity prevailed, and where the vices or crimes of an individual marked him out as an object of infamy or of punishment; but in the infancy of the colony in New South Wales, guilt and vice were the characterestics of the whole nation. It was to be a people of thieves and outlaws, under the controul of their military guards. Thieves and their keepers—prisoners and their jailors—these were to be the whole population.

If such a project ever could have been successful, at least the persons transported should have been only those who were sentenced to that punishment for life, and not men who, being sentenced for a few years only, would soon have a right by law to quit the colony. The greatest number, however, who were transported, were of this description. In the first embarkations which took place, the gross injustice was committed of not sending to the colony any account of the period at which the sentences commenced; and Collins relates, that when several convicts claimed their liberty, it was necessary to inform them that inquiry should be made in England of the truth of their statement, but that they must remain in bondage till an answer was received to the inquiry, which would be at least a year and a half. During the whole time that the colony has existed, men have been transported, who, at the time when they were embarked had only a few years to come of the time for which they were sentenced, It appears by the returns from the office of the secretary of state now on the table, that in June 1801, no fewer than 40 men were transported, each of whom had only one year of the term of his punishment to come when he was embarked, and ten of them had only nine months, and this, although the voyage is of nine months; so that when they reached the place of their punishment, they had by law no punishment to suffer.

It appears by the same returns, that so late as in the month of August last, two men were transported, who at the time of their being sent out of the country had not two years to come of the term of their punishment. When these cases were mentioned before, some gentlemen endeavoured to account for them by supposing that it must have been at the request of these convicts themselves that they were transported: but I am fully convinced that there is no foundation whatever for that supposition. The last instances are so recent, that the fact might easily be ascertained. The truth, I believe, is, that this flagrant injustice is to be ascribed only to the negligence, but a very criminal negligence it certainly is, of those on whom the execution of these sentences depends.

Indeed, not only with a view to the prosperity of the colony, but to the justice which is due even to convicted criminals, none should be transported to so distant a part of the world who are not sentenced to transportation for life, unless they were, at the expence of government, brought back to their country at the expiration of the term of their punishment. Left to get back to their native country as they can, their only resource is to work their passage home as sailors; but this is a resource only for the strong and healthy. To the sickly, the aged, and infirm, the sentence, which by law is limited to a certain number of years, becomes in fact a sentence for life. With women it necessarily becomes such a sentence in every case; and yet, from the first adoption of this system, there have been, exclusive of those who sailed a few months ago, on board the Canada transport, no fewer than 1,754 women transported for the term of seven years: 1,754 persons, who, for offences which the law has declared deserved no severer punishment than transportation for seven years, have been actually transported for life, and those of a sex, which, if all notions of justice were to be disregarded, might seem at least deserving of some compassion. If in England any jailor were to presume to retain a single individual in prison, though but for a few weeks, after the term of his imprisonment had expired, what indignation would not be felt at such a flagrant abuse of authority?—but the continuance of such injustice during all the lives of thousands who are made the victims of it, passes almost unnoticed when the scene is removed to so great a distance from us.

The punishment of transportation has indeed been sometimes considered as one of no great severity, and I have been very sorry to hear it so represented by those on whom the inflicting it depends. It is, indeed, often inflicted at the quarter sessions, for petty larcenies, not attended with any circumstances of aggravation; it is sometimes inflicted on boys at a very early age, merely as the means of separating them effectually from the bad connections they may have formed at home. It were much to be wished, that those who consider transportation in this light, would impose upon themselves the duty of reading Mr. Collins's history of the settlement, that they might acquire a just notion of all the complicated hardships and sufferings to which transported convicts are exposed.

I have touched only on a few of the evils of this species of punishment, and it is because I enlarged so fully before on many others that I pass them over now. No person, surely, who has reflected on this subject, can doubt that it is expedient to try some other mode of punishment. That of the penitentiary houses can, indeed, hardly be called an experiment; it has already been tried, and every where with success. We are not only informed of the good effects of it in the states of North America, where it has been adopted, but we have seen them in several parts of England, and in the instances of those penitentiary houses which the secretary for Ireland lately mentioned in this House. Too much praise, indeed, cannot be given to the Irish government, for the attention they have paid to this subject, and the most sanguine could not have hoped for greater success than has attended their exertions. It is earnestly to be wished that their example may be followed by his Majesty's ministers here.—He concluded by moving, "That an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, that his Majesty would be graciously pleased to give directions for carrying into execution so much of the act of the 19th of the King, entitled, 'An act to explain and amend the laws relating to the transportation, imprisonment, and other punishment of certain offenders,' as relates to penitentiary houses, and for carrying into exetion the act of the 34th of the King, entitled, 'An act for erecting a penitentiary house or houses for confining and employing convicts.'"

Sir, I concur so much in the general principles laid down upon the subject of penitentiary houses, that I feel it necessary to state, that I cannot but agree in the motion of my learned friend. At the same time I am sorry that my learned friend has brought this subject before the House at a time when some gentlemen did entertain a hope that at this late period of the session it would not have been agitated, and particularly because the House was not in possession of such satisfactory information as would enable it to form a competent opinion upon this subject. There are other additional reasons which incline me to think that this is a season extremely inauspicious for the entertainment of this question. An hon. and learned gent. who has applied himself most laboriously to the consideration of this subject, and from whom the House may derive the most important information, not having yet made any communication to me upon it, I am extremely anxious for the assistance he is so well able to give me before I can form my determinate opinion. I am the more anxious to have a communication with sir George Paul, the learned and hon. gent. to whom I allude, and also with another hon. baronet, a member of this House, be- cause I am given to understand that the result of their labours has been, to ascertain that the plan for erecting penitentiary houses, as described in the 19th and 34th of the King, is not only very defective, but that the state of things at present renders it impossible to carry it into execution. They, I understand, are of opinion, that very considerable improvements may be made in the system which was then adopted. This opinion, Sir, will appear the more reasonable and consistent when we recollect, that the plan contained in those acts was that which was first introduced by Mr. Howard into this country, and that at a time, too, when the public attention was not sufficiently directed to it; the experience of subsequent years doubtless shews that some alteration is not only requisite, but highly necessary. I should therefore hope, that the hon. and learned gent. would be disposed to withdraw his motion for the present, upon the positive understanding, that at an early period of the next session of Parliament it would be entertained in a manner more befitting the importance of the subject. I do think more justice will be done to it by such an arrangement. We shall be better able to compare the merits of Mr. Howard's system, with the system adopted in these acts of Parliament. The injustice with which it must now be treated would be avoided. We shall then be in possession of the collective opinions of those respectable gentlemen who have directed so much of their time and attention to its merits; the House will then be better able to see the defects of the 19th and 34th of the King; they will be better able to judge what alterations may be prudently made in those acts; and lastly, they will be more competent to forward the objects of the learned and hon. gent.—It is no very inconsiderable object for the House to understand the tendency of these acts of Parliament, as they at present exist; and it is of no less importance that the plan they describe should be most maturely considered. It is proposed by these acts, to erect a great penitentiary house in this metropolis, capable of holding from 900 to 1,000 persons, and to be enlarged as might be thought expedient or necessary. I believe that the very erection of such a building as this would cost at least 100,000l. I speak only of my own belief; but, leaving the subject of expence out of the question, it has been very much doubted whether a penitentiary house of that size, and calculated to hold that number of persons, is a good system; and whether a greater number of penitentiary houses situated in different parts of the country, capable of holding only a much smaller number of persons, is not a much more eligible system. Now, Sir, that is so serious a doubt, and may be supported by so many specious arguments, that I would presume to suggest to my learned friend the necessity, as well as the prudence, of farther delay; because, should these acts be carried into effect, without more mature deliberation, it would not be, perhaps, hazarding too much to say, that we blindly ran into a plan, without considering what we were about to do. So anxious, therefore, am I to avoid the risk of getting into a wrong path, and of expending the public money to disadvantage, especially when, by the short delay of eight or nine months, we may be able to form a better plan, and upon principles more secure against such objections, that I think the House would act with great imprudence if they adopted the present motion. If my learned friend would propose to commence this system upon a much smaller scale, there would be less danger of falling into an improper course; at least, if it failed, the loss would not be so grievously felt: but he must recollect to what evil he would expose the House, if a failure attended this plan, when executed to the fullest extent. Having erected a large building, at an enormous expence to the country, you find it does not answer the purpose you intended, and you must therefore pull it down again. I do hope and trust that my learned friend, in a question of so much doubt, will withdraw his motion for the present session, under the solemn assurance, that early in the next I shall be the first to establish a committee to take the matter into serious consideration.—Sir, with respect to the hulks, that is a question not at all connected with the subject under discussion, at least with the motion of the hon. and learned gentleman. I am therefore little disposed to argue it, not so much on account of the season elected for its introduction, as on account of the defective information upon which we should proceed to form a decided judgment. I do hope, however, that the hon. and learned gent. will, in the course of the ensuing summer, take upon himself the trouble of inspecting those depots, and I am not without hopes that he will find himself deceived in the opinion he has formed of them. I have always admitted that there are many defects in them, but they are defects capable of being remedied by proper regulations; and lam firmly of opinion, that without these objections, and under amended rules, it is a species of establishment most desirable to be maintained. With respect to the accounts that my learned friend has received upon the subject of transportation, and into which I do not wish to enter, I have made the most minute inquiries as to the truth of them, and I have reason for thinking that they are devoid of foundation. I speak thus positively, because I made it matter of special investigation. There are weekly accounts brought to my office of the state of the convicts on board the hulks, and from them I am periodically possessed of the best possible information. I can therefore assure the House, that the reports to which the hon. and learned gent. alludes are totally unfounded. With respect to the instances of those persons who were sent to Botany Bay for the full period of their sentence, after having been confined for two years on board the hulks, I have also inquired into those facts, and I find that they are exactly as stated by the hon. and learned gent.; but upon further investigation I find that the conduct of those two persons was so bad and so mutinous, that they were sent to Botany Bay, with the remainder of the crew on board the hulk, who assisted in their misconduct. These two instances are so far certainly correct; but the practice of sending men to Botany Bay, after they have been confined on board the hulks for a considerable time, without any remission of their former sentence, is by no means common. The rule is this: those sentenced for 14 years and more are generally sent to their final destination; but those for 7 years are suffered to remain on board the hulks, unless by their misconduct it be deemed necessary to send them off also. But the general rule is to keep them on board the hulks. Upon this subject, however, I anticipate that the hon. and learned gent., after inspecting the hulks, will form a very favourable opinion, at least very different from that which he now entertains. Sir, with the general principles laid down by the hon. and learned gent. upon the subject of penitentiary houses, I perfectly agree, and I feel so friendly to the measure, that my cordial Support shall not be wanting to its attainment early in the next session.

.—Sir, I feel that I can add no observation to the speech of my hon. and learned friend, which could more strongly impress upon the House the wisdom and expediency of the measure which he has brought under their consideration. I am desirous, however, of expressing my intire and cordial concurrence, not only on the particular course which has been pursued on this occasion by my hon. friend, but also in those principles upon which he has recommended the adoption of the measure to the House. I rejoice also to find that the principles which have been stated by my hon. friend have met with the approbation of the right hon. gent. who has just sat down; and I have only to regret that he does not support the principles of which he approves, by voting for the motion of my hon. friend. If the object of the present motion had been to introduce any sudden or violent change in the law, or to introduce a new mode of punishment, there might then have been some foundation for the objections which have been urged by the right hon. gent. But, on the contrary, the present motion proceeds upon principles which have been already discussed and adopted, and calls upon the House to stimulate the executive government to give effect to a law which has received the sanction of this and the other House of parliament, and which has too long remained dormant in the statute book. Under such circumstances, it is impossible to charge the hon. mover with precipitancy, or with rashly attempting to introduce innovations in the law, and it would be idle to postpone the motion, as has been suggested, until a committee could be appointed, and the result of their labours reported to the House. For what benefit could be expected to result from the appointment of such a committee? Is it likely that any new facts could be disclosed, or any new principles be suggested which were not known to, or considered by the House at the time the law, to which it is now wished to give effect, was passed. We now know, from the very full and satisfactory statement which was made on a former night by the right hon. the secretary for Ireland, that the most beneficial effects have resulted from the establishment in Ireland of a Penitentiary House upon a plan similar to that which is now recommended. The punishment of transportation to New South Wales is now carried to so great an extent, that 700 or 800 individuals are fre- quently sent there in the course of a year; and we all know the objections to that mode of punishment, both as it respects the situation of the delinquents before they leave this country, and after they reach the place of their destination. The question, in so far as it respects the condition of criminals before they leave this country, does not turn, as the right hon. gent. seems to suppose, entirely on the manner in which the hulks are now conducted, but on the objections to that mode of punishment, even supposing it to be well regulated. For the indiscriminate mixture of criminals of all descriptions and characters, of old and young offenders, which is so much more likely to corrupt the least abandoned, than to reform the most profligate, is, of itself, a radical objection to the system of the hulks. It is on this account, therefore, that I cannot concur with the right. hon. gent. in thinking, that we ought to discuss the present motion without any reference to the effects resulting from sending criminals on board the hulks. It appears too, from the returns on the table, that each individual who is sentenced to be transported to Botany Bay, remains for a great length of time on board the hulks, before an opportunity of transporting him occurs; and there are even instances in which scarce a year of the period of banishment was un-expired at the time of the criminal's leaving this country. If such inconveniences are inseparable from the punishment of transportation when carried to its present extent, it becomes the indispensable duty of the executive government, and of the legislature, to concur in substituting a mode of punishment which is not liable to these fatal objections; and none better that that which is recommended by the present motion has been suggested. If the object of my hon. friend's motion had been to abolish altogether the punishment of transportation to Botany Bay, I should have hesitated before I gave my vote in support of such a measure. But when we recollect that the comforts and enjoyments of a criminal, on his arrival in Botany Bay, are regulated, not by the nature of the offence of which he has been guilty, but the trade which he has followed when in England; for it is well known that every offender on his arrival is examined, not as to the nature of his crime, but as to his powers of administering to the wants and necessities of the colony. Thus he who has been guilty of the most venial offence, and to the commission of which he may have been instigated by the sufferings of a starving family, is neglected and left to struggle with all the difficulties of the situation, because he is not possessed of the means of administering to the wants and comforts of others; while the most hardened offender, because he can render himself useful to the colony, is indulged with his freedom, and is enabled to command all the conveniencies and luxuries of the place. If to those considerations we add the suffering in the hulks, the inconveniencies of a long voyage, and the difficulty of returning after the expiration of the period of banishment, the House must perceive how desirable it is, that the number of persons transported, should at least be limited, and some other punishment substituted, which is not liable to such irresistible objections, and which holds out more flattering prospects of reforming the morals, and meliorating the future condition of minor delinquents. The case indeed of the women who are transported to Botany Bay is peculiarly hard, and calls most loudly for immediate redress, for no provision being made by the public for the return of culprits when the period of their banishment is arrived, the men can only return to their native country by working their passage home; and this, the only means of return, is impossible for the unfortunate females. It is obvious therefore, that the punishment of those who are afterwards to be thrown back upon society, ought to be such as is calculated to confirm them in habits of industry, and to reform their morals; and these objects are very rarely attained by confinement on board the hulks, or by transportation to Botany Bay; and therefore it is that I feel so desirous that no time should be lost in adopting the motion of my hon. and learned friend. The right hon. gent. has objected to the extent, size, and scale of the penitentiary house which is directed by the Act of Parliament to which the present motion refers. But the right hon. gent. must feel that it is for the principle only that we contend, and if the objections of the right hon. gent. are well founded, there can be no difficulty in inducing the House to amend or alter the act in such manner as may render it most likely to attain the beneficial and important objects it has in view. All we ask is, that the executive government will make a beginning, and in this, as in all other similar cases, much may be expected from observation and experience. The principles of my hon. friend seem to be generally approved, they have been sanctioned by former parliaments, and we are now enabled to add the result of practical experience in Ireland; and it is for these reasons that I shall give my most cordial support to the present motion.

.—Sir, although I am of opinion, and I am sure many other members go along with me in the same sentiment, that the system proposed is one which must be attended with many most important advantages, yet there are one or two considerations which induce me to think that the House would do well in not carrying this motion in the present session of parliament. For my own part, I have had no opportunity of witnessing the effects of the system, although I am disposed to believe that many great benefits may result from it. I feel, however, that it becomes us, as guardians of the public purse, to see what risk we shall be likely to run in seeking that advantage; and I am not clearly satisfied that it is not too much to call upon us to run at once into an undertaking, without well considering the reasons for what we do; nor am I less certain, in my own mind, that we should be acting wisely, in calling upon the executive government to lay out a large sum of the public money upon a plan, the advantages of which are in a great degree problematical. A right hon. gent. has hinted the idea of referring the matter to the consideration of a committee. For my own part I do not think that such a proceeding would be liable to the objection which the hon. and learned gent. who last spoke, seemed to anticipate. I really think it is the most eligible step the House could take in forwarding the object of the hon. and learned gent. who introduced this motion. A committee possesses advantages which the House collectively does not. In a committee, the details of the plan may be more amply discussed. If there be any defect in the plan described by these acts, the committee can remedy them, and produce for the final consideration of the House a system more perfect, or, at least, less objectionable than the plan at present proposed. Certainly, it appears to me, that, in the present state of the subject, uninformed as the House is upon the particular merits of this plan, and having before it no materials upon which it can come to a satisfactory judgment, it is quite impossible to give effect to the motion of the hon. and learned gent. It seems to be a matter of doubt and uncertainty, even with those who are best informed on the subject, whether large or small Penitentiary Houses would be the most eligible; and surely, I may venture to say, that it is of some small consequence to the House whether it expends 20,000l. or 200,000l. They will pause, I hope, before they suffer a question, so little defined, to depend upon the mere judgment of the executive government. It is important, I think also, for us to know, before we trust so large a sum of money in their hands, to what extent it is to be applied. With respect to the fears of the hon. and learned gent. for the continuation of the mischiefs already complained of, until next session of parliament, by not agreeing to this motion, I do not see the misfortune in the same light which he seems to do. The circumstance of this motion being agreed to will not lessen the number of transportations, nor will its rejection accumulate any heavier misfortunes on the heads of those who are now subject to the present system. An Address to his Majesty, praying his Majesty will be graciously pleased to give directions to carry into effect the 19th and 34th of the King, will in no degree operate in stopping a single transportation, which may be deemed necessary in the course of that short interval. Sir, in every point of view in which I consider this subject, I do think it is too much to call upon the King's ministers, in the present state of things to do this, especially after the reasonable, and, I should consider, satisfactory pledge given. It is a positive assurance, that, early in the next session of parliament the subject will be taken up with the utmost seriousness and deliberation. But though I am aware that further delay is necessary, I am not insensible to the imprudent remissness of government in suffering a plan like this, which I must assume to be eligible in principle, to lie dormant on the statute book for upwards of thirty years. I should extremely lament being the instrument of causing a longer postponement of this important subject upon any frivolous grounds, but I see so many serious reasons for justifying me in the opposition I now give, that I think apology is hardly necessary. The pledge given by his Majesty's ministers to take this question into serious consideration early in the next session, is so satisfactory a reason to my mind why the subject should not now be pressed, that I cannot give my assent to the motion of the hon. and learned gent.

said, he hoped, that while this subject was now before the House, he might be permitted to say a few words, without, however, any disposition, on his part, unnecessarily to lengthen the debate. There was no man who more deeply lamented than he did, that a measure like this, which promised so many advantages to society, should have remained for such a series of years, a mere dead letter on the Statute Book. He was sorry for the credit of parliament, that the motion of his hon. and learned friend, which contained so severe a reproach on its character, was but too well justified. Really, Sir, said he, when I reflect that the legislature has had before its eyes, for so many years, not only an opportunity of witnessing the disadvantages of the present system, but of scarcely avoiding the knowledge of its glaring defects, without resorting to some measure of reformation, I can express myself only in terms of wonder and surprise. Although I am justified perhaps, in addressing you, Sir, in the tone which I now do, by the apparent failure of parliament in the execution of its duty, I must not, therefore, lose sight of any circumstance of extenuation which might remove so unfavourable an impression of its character. I know it has occurred to the good sense and discernment of many members of this House, that some plan for the employment of the convicts, and those persons punishable with imprisonment, or some other regulation to prevent the necessity of sending so many individuals to New South Wales, was an object most anxiously to be wished. Indeed, so much was this subject thought of, and so near was the plan to its execution, that a piece of ground was actually purchased on which it was intended to erect a building, and the sum of 20,000l. was spent in forwarding its completion. This did encourage in me hopes that it would have been carried into execution, not so much on account of the comparatively trifling expence of its maintenance, which in the present times is a matter of no small importance, when compared with the annual charge there is upon the country in supporting, our colony in New South Wales, but as the beginning of a system which promised so many important advantages to the nation at large. If we wanted argument, in addition to the encouraging prospect the system itself holds out, let us look to the effect of it upon the happiness of the different countries, wherein it has received encouragement. If we wish to consult economy, if we wish to resort to a plan which should reduce the expence of supporting those whose vices point out the necessity of their removal from honest society, that advantage will be secured by this system. But that, though of some consequence, is secondary to the other good consequences which must follow in the train of such an institution. The great and cardinal excellence of this system, is to restore to society the unhappy wretch, whose vices have brought him to premature ignominy and disgrace. This great end is to be obtained by the discipline which he is to undergo while confined in the penitentiary-house. Religious instruction, and moral precept, are to be applied to restore his mind to a sense of shame and repentance for his past conduct. Whilst in this state of progressive reformation, he is taught useful employments, so that when he is again restored to society he may not relapse into his former vices for the want of means by which he can earn an honest livelihood. During his continuance in this asylum, he is kept a-part from the contamination of a society worse than himself. A portion of his earnings are to be laid up for his use when he is discharged from the house; and when that event takes place, he goes forth, not as many persons do, who are desirous of altering a vicious course of life, without character to recommend them to honest employment, but he goes out into the world recommended, and not without a provision for his immediate subsistence. But the advantages of this institution do not rest here. The ignorant and uninformed are instructed in such rudiments of education as may be useful to them in forwarding their views in life. They are taught to read and to write, and are instructed in all knowledge which may be necessary to persons in that situation of life. That such a plan as this should have remained so long upon your statute book. with only one feeble attempt to revive it, at the end of 16 years, is, I own, a surprising instance of the remissness of parliament. However I am satisfied that the delay has in no degree arisen from any idea that this plan was impracticable, but in consequence of a difficulty as to the spot most eligible for carrying the plan into execution. In the warmth of the discussion excited by this, the thing went by, and the plan was, if not forgotten, at least dropt without any struggle. Other objects soon excited the public attention, and the penitentiary-houses were forgotten. Now, however, that the subject is again revived, I hope we shall hear of no unnecessary difficulties to prevent its adoption, and that the hon. and learned gent. who has taken upon himself the trouble of bringing it forward, will not lightly give up so meritorious a task. Much has been said by my hon. and learned friend in deprecation of the system of transporting persons for a limited number of years to Botany Bay. I enter most cordially into his views upon this subject. The impolicy as well as the impropriety of transporting persons for a given number of years, appears to me so manifest, that I wonder this consideration alone has not excited the attention of the legislature to so important a subject, and induced an anxiety to adopt some measure upon the principle of the penitentiary-house. I think, Sir, that if the punishment of transportation is a necessary measure of severity, it should be for the whole of the convict's life: because when the unfortunate person reaches his destination, and knows that he can never return to his native country, he makes up his mind to his fate. Cut off from those vicious connections with whom he had been accustomed to associate, his mind, if it be at all well disposed, naturally turns itself to honest employment. He feels that he is now placed in a situation, where, if he be industrious and virtuously disposed, he will receive encouragement; and he feels a natural desire to reform his bad habits, sensible that it is the only way he can acquire a character, or ever hope to rise in the estimation of society. But the man who is transported only for a few years, and dissatisfied languishes for the expiration of that term, which will free him from his imprisonment. Every act of duty or of expiation imposed upon him, he executes with murmuring and discontent, and looks only to the day of his departure. After these few observations with which I have troubled the House, I shall only add that, recollecting how frequently this plan has been near to maturity, and not discovering any necessity for further delay, I shall support the motion.

.—Sir; I am extremely happy to. find, that we differ only in the mode in which we shall carry into execution a plan, the principle of which is admitted to be good; and certainly for my own part, if the House was called upon to adopt one plan in preference to another, as better calculated to carry the principle into effect, I should give this plan my immediate and cordial support. I think with my learned friend, that it is a great reproach to the legislature, that they hare paid so little attention to this subject. Undoubtedly the mode of punishment now almost universally adopted, is not calculated to produce on the mind of the offender, any sense of his disgraceful situation, or to amend his habits. If there be a chance of producing this good—the excellent principle upon which the penitentiary houses are founded, is that by which it is to be accomplished. The prospects it holds out are flattering and pleasing. If it is possible to reform the bad habits of men, and to restore them to a sense of shame, the principles of this system seem above all others the best calculated to attain that desirable end. If it is possible to point out a mode of practical reform, by which you can restore to society a class of men, whose services, according to the old system, have been utterly lost to the public, the mode now under discussion seems to be the wisest and the most perfect that human wisdom can suggest. I many years ago had an opportunity of witnessing the good effects of this system, in the county of Oxford, where it was first adopted, and where its beneficial effects were immediately felt—a great and important change took place in the criminal jurisdiction of that county, and the catalogue of offences was immediately reduced. Men who were before for ever lost to society, were now restored to their country, and to their friends. Instead of spending idle, unprofitable, and infamous lives in prisons; instead of suffering the early seeds of vice to be nurtured into hardened and desperate villainy, they were confined in a situation, where they were classed according to their respective offences—the comparatively venial were kept to themselves, and all communication with the most depraved and wicked was immediately suspended. Their time was rendered profitable, not only to themselves, but to the public—they were taught useful employments—they were corrected in their morals, and reformed in their habits, and at the end of the time to which their confinement was to extend, instead of being thrown upon the public, to lead a life of idleness, which would infallibly undo all the labours of those under whom they had been placed, they were fixed in a situation where they might employ their talents, such as they were, honestly and honourably—or they had nothing to do but to step into their own trades, with renovated character, and a prospect of encouragement for future good behaviour—and the consequence was, that many, led astray in the first instance by bad example, and all the other numerous incentives to vice, almost inseparable from large towns, were brought back to a sense of their error, and restored to respectable society. Sir, we need only consider for a moment the advantages of this system, to be sensible of the defects of our own. But those defects which have been a long time manifest without comparison, become doubly glaring by contrast. Whilst my hon. and learned friend is entitled to the thanks of the House and of the country, for the motion now offered for consideration, we must at the same time take especial care that we do not commit ourselves, by acting hastily. We are now called upon to carry into effect the acts of the 19th and 34th of the king, which prima facie may appear a very reasonable proposition. But Sir, there are reasons, which strike my mind, to be very forcible, why it would not be prudent to adopt the precise plan prescribed by these acts. In the first place, I am extremely anxious that the House should be provided with every information, by which they may be able to form a correct estimate of the merits of that plan. I am the more inclined to think that the necessity for some delay is not without very strong foundation, because an hon. baronet, and a member of this House, who has turned much of his attention to this subject, has discovered many defects in the present plan, to which it would be wise for the House to turn its attention. Now as this is a subject of very serious consideration, I hope I shall be excused for entertaining a very anxious wish, to have the very best possible plan adopted for carrying these principles into execution. In vain shall we seek for the advantages so ably described by the hon. and learned gent., and by other hon. members, as appertaining to this system, if we do not assure ourselves in the first instance, that we have adopted the wisest and safest course. I am therefore extremely anxious that the House should avail itself of the benefit of the opinions of those who have turned so much of their thoughts to the consideration of this subject. I am persuaded we shall derive much useful and important information by a little delay, of which we shall be deprived by hastily adopting this plan, or at least it will come too late to be of any service. But Sir, there is another reason, which induces me to think that more deliberation is requisite in coming to a decisive conclusion upon this subject. And it is this: I wish exceedingly to consider whether it is not better to extend our plan, not confining it simply and merely to the metropolis, but to all the counties of England. Besides, Sir, it is not sufficient to direct our attention to the merits of the principle and of the plan itself, I am extremely anxious to know in whose hands the execution of it is to be intrusted. For that reason it would be well for the House to be put in possession of the names of those persons, who are prepared to come forward, to second the efforts of the executive government, and add strength and vigour to the plan. Certainly upon this subject, government is not insensible to its merits, nor is it less anxious to adopt any measure which may improve the domestic polity of this country. If we are now to adopt the plan as it is at present prescribed, without any consideration or reference to the alteration of events or circumstances since its first projection, we may in all probability have to undo all that we shall have done. It may be necessary also to consider, whether one great penitentiary house, or whether many small ones will be the most preferable. For these reasons, and they appear to my mind to be very cogent, I think it will be not only necessary, that the House should be well informed upon the subject, and that they should take time to consider what plan is best calculated to carry this system into execution. Sir, I can assure the House, that it is not for the purpose of unnecessary or futile delay that we wish the hon. and learned gent. to withdraw his motion for the present; it originates in an anxiety that the plan proposed for our adoption should be as free as possible from defects which may render abortive their best exertions for its success. Under these cir-stances, I cannot consistently support the present motion.

begged to say a few words upon the merits of his hon. and learned friend's proposition.—"Sir," said he, "this motion comes before us recommended. First, as it is founded upon two acts of parliament, the wisdom and principle of which no man is bold enough to question; and, secondly, as it has originated with my honourable and learned friend, who, whilst others have been deriving theoretical knowledge upon subjects of this nature, has had experience and practice, both in and out of this House. The thanks of this House are due to my hon. and learned friend, for the anxiety and solicitude which he has evinced in endeavouring to rescue from oblivion a plan, that has remained upon your statute book, merely as waste paper, for upwards of thirty years. But, Sir, how poorly have his indefatigable exertions been rewarded: and how tamely has his proposition been received! The honourable and learned gentleman, with all his zeal, has proposed a course of proceeding which is likely to defeat the whole object he has in view. Sir, the hon. and learned gent. instead of wishing advantage to be taken of the opportunity which my learned friend has afforded us, of adopting this much desired plan, means to let this favourable instant go by, and would recommend to other gentlemen a fatal procrastination, which must destroy all hope of ever coming to any practical result upon the subject. He talks to us of a committee to consider the various plans that have been drawn by different surveyors, and a thousand other things, which could have no other effect but to encumber the subject with a load of useless disquisition. Another honourable gentleman who has spoken in favour of procrastination, has not argued upon true grounds, in supposing the plan could not be carried into execution, because we have not before us the precise estimate of the expense of building the penitentiary house. Sir, I would ask, what is there to prevent the building from going on without this? You have before you an eligible plan, you know its extent, and you can form a pretty accurate estimate of the expense. Sir, I would presume to contend, that this is a part of the subject with which the committee could have nothing to do. Their particular duty would consist in examining the internal regulations of the institution, and in prescribing what modes of employment the persons confined in the penitentiary house should be taught, and various other considerations, which I will admit do require some deliberation. But, Sir, if we now submit to this procrastination, the interval will be lost between this and the next session of parliament; and then, perhaps, we should have to deplore the remissness of parliament in suffering another additional year, to go by, without attempting to remedy the abuses which are now so loudly and so justly the subject of complaint. Upon these grounds I should be extremely desirous of the immediate adoption of this address, and more especially so, not that I think the question of expense is matter of no importance, but on account of the additional number of persons who must suffer by the procrastination, The injustice, Sir, done in the cases my honourable and learned friend has so feelingly described, the number of persons who have been confined for a considerable time, and then sent to Botany Bay for the full term of their sentence, and the possibility that similar cruelties may be practised between this and the next session, are considerations sufficient to justify the anxiety my honourable and learned friend feels for the immediate adoption of this plan. Sir, when we consider also the state of the hulks, and the abuses, I don't mean criminal or intentional ones, but abuses which have prevailed in the system, and which are likely to continue, it would be the height of injustice to suffer the present session to pass by without some attempt at reformation. Sir, all these things call most loudly for the adoption of the plan,—a plan which was never rejected, but which, on the contrary, received the sanction of parliament a second time, but has had the misfortune to remain a dead letter upon your statute book ever since, not only as a reproach to the character of parliament, but as another instance of injustice to the public. I do hope, therefore, that the House will not aggravate these grievances by wishing for a farther postponement. And here I am willing to bear ray testimony to the attention which was paid to this system, and the persevering and indefatigable labours bestowed upon the subject, before the present plan was adopted. It was not adopted upon slight grounds, upon idle report, or the vague fame of the system in other countries. The statute book was consulted, every information upon the subject was collected with an industry that did great credit to the gentlemen who undertook the business. At length, after the most mature deliberation, the present plan was fixed upon. Let us not be told then, that the House has been called upon unawares, that they have been taken by surprise, and that the subject is not un- derstood. Sir, there is no pretence for such excuses. If any gentleman doubts the excellence of this system, let him witness what has passed in Ireland, in America, in Holland, and in Gloucester. Let the right hon. gentleman and the hon. and learned gent, consult the papers on your table, and they will find abundant reason why they ought to vote for the immediate adoption of this address. Sir, the right hon. gent. has advised my hon. and learned friend to visit the hulks this summer. I apprehend if he does do so, he will not have much reason to alter his opinion as to the merits of the system altogether. It has fallen to my lot to make some inquiries upon this subject, to which I was induced by complaints having reached my ears of some its most glaring abuses. It is but too easily guessed that the complaints of the unfortunate persons themselves would be little attended to; but being called upon by a person who stated a complaint to me, I thought it my duty to go to the office of the right hon. gent. and make some inquiries. A return was made to me sufficient to satisfy my mind that the system was in itself so bad, as to require the interposition of the legislature. I am persuaded that every gentleman who considers this branch of the subject with any degree of patience, will feel his humanity and zeal so much interested, that he will acknowledge the necessity of adopting the system now for the third time brought under the consideration of the House. I am certainly not so sanguine upon the subject, as to suppose that the old system can be done away all at once, nor am I persuaded that you can put every offender, whose case does not call for the last and severest measure of punishment, into a penitentiary house. That, I think, appears at present, quite impossible. But I do not think this observation ought in the least degree to lessen the pressing necessity there is for adopting forthwith the address of my honourable and learned friend. By proceeding to this immediately, you will do much good, or you will at least prevent much harm between the present time and the next session of parliament. By delay, other subjects will intervene to divert the attention of the legislature. The public attention will be otherwise occupied, and we shall hear no more of the penitentiary houses.—We have heard something upon the subject of solitary confinement, or at least, of the expediency of confining men by themselves and pre- venting all intercourse with the other inhabitants of their prison, as an efficacious means of restoring them to a sense of their disgraceful situation. At the time that this subject was first agitated in this country, the opinions of Mr. Howard and Mr. Justice Blackstone were pretty freely delivered upon this point, to the authority of the former of whom, the hon. gent. (Mr. Wilberforce) has undoubtedly alluded. Certainly no men in this country were better able to give their opinion upon a subject of this nature, and none so capable of forming a correct judgment. But so far was Mr. Howard from approving of solitary confinement as a punishment, as the right hon. gent. seems to think he did, that he distinctly, and without reserve, expressed his abhorrence of it. I have heard him say, that such a punishment was too severe for human reason to bear—that he had seen instances of the cruelty and harshness of it, carried to such an extent that made him shudder with horror. Derangement and madness, in its most hideous and shocking form, often resulted from this species of punishment. I am persuaded that the opinion of such a man could not have been wilfully misrepresented, and that the right hon. gent. must only have had the ill luck to misunderstand his sentiments. I have myself seen a person committed to solitary confinement for two years: but I trust I shall never behold another instance of the same kind again; and I only hope those who administer the justice of the country will reflect on the sentiment of the immortal Howard—"That solitary imprisonment is too severe for mankind to endure." Sir, I shall give my hearty concurrence to this motion.

rose to explain. He said he was sorry to be misunderstood. What he observed with respect to solitary imprisonment, was that it might be a punishment usefully and judiciously applied, and in his opinion he was borne out by Mr. Howard, who he remembered to have said distinctly that solitary confinement, used as a medicine to the mind, gave an opportunity to the penitent of reflecting upon his misconduct, and of reforming the worst passions of his heart.

rose to speak in reply. He said as there seemed to be but one opinion in the House as to the principle of the subject under discussion, he should not occupy much more of the time of the House. But I am more in- clined, said he, to trespass, for a short time, on its attention, because I am anxious to remove an unfavourable impression which seems to possess the minds of some gentlemen as to the occasion of this subject being brought forward at so late a period of the session. I did hope the House would have acquitted me of any disposition to take it by surprise, after the course of conduct which I have pursued upon this subject. The House may recollect that I made a motion similar to this much earlier in the present session, and that I stated that it was not my intention then to press the House to a decision upon it, but that I was only desirous of putting his Majesty's ministers in possession of what I had in contemplation to do, and if they wished to consider the subject before the House was called on to decide upon it, I would withdraw my motion and move it again on a future day. It has since been put off from time to time for the convenience of the ministers, or because other matters thought to be more important have occupied the attention of the House. Under these circumstances, I certainly cannot accede to the proposal of again withdrawing my motion untill next session, for the purpose of having the subject then referred to a committee.—In the first place, I cannot see what a committee is to do; is the committee to inquire into the effects of the penitentiary houses where they have been tried? What necessity, can there be for this inquiry, when it appears to be the unanimous opinion of the House that they would be attended with good effect?—It is said that improvements might possibly be made in the plan of penitentiary houses, and that in a committee, a great deal of information might be collected on the subject; and a learned gentleman has said, that by this mode of proceeding we shall give time in furthering our object; but with a plan so matured, and stated to us with such details as that which we have before us, ought we to lay it aside, because there is a chance of improvements being made upon it, till a committee shall have considered the subject, and examined all the different ideas which may be suggested to them, and have made a report upon them. The present plan was the result of long and mature consideration. It had been suggested and considered for several years before the bill was passed. It was the work of men who had devoted great part of their lives to the subject, and after they had ad- vanced so far as to get their plan embodied in an act of parliament, we are now desired in a future session of parliament to begin again, and to send the subject for consideration to a committee: the committee, after some mature reflection, and much time spent, may make their report; they may recommend a plan which may appear to them more perfect than this, in the course of some years we may perhaps hope to have another act passed, and when that act has remained unexecuted as this has done, we shall be just where we now are, and some member may hereafter be requiring the House, as I now am, to desire the execution of the law they have made; and this course is recommended to us as the means of gaining time. I cannot but think that it would occasion a great loss of time. If the address is carried, and effectual steps are taken for erecting the penitentiary houses, still there will be time enough before they are completed to pass any acts in the course of the next sessions, which may be thought to improve the system. But my learned friend, the solicitor-general, has suggested that the committee might inquire into the state of oar jails, and the improvements to be made in them, and that both objects may be accomplished at the same time. I cannot but think that by pursuing these different objects at the same time, we are likely not to accomplish either of them, and that after a great deal of time has been occupied, the matter will, from our attempting too much at once, be likely to fall again into neglect, and to be forgotten, as has happened before. Notwithstanding what has been said of the state of the prisoners on board the hulks, I am still convinced that the evils which attend that species of punishment, far surpass any advantages that may be supposed to result from them; where prisoners of all descriptions are confined together, and where, as is now the case, boys of 15 or 16, are compelled to be the companions of the most depraved and profligate of mankind, it is impossible that the worst consequences should not follow to the unhappy wretches who are subjected to this punishment, as well as to the community. With respect to solitary confinement, I entirely concur in what has been said of it by the member for Yorkshire. I have always thought that complete solitude, and without occupation of any kind, was much too severe a punishment to be inflicted for any of- fence. Indeed one cannot but be shocked, when one reflects upon the levity with which such punishments have of late years been inflicted in this country, without any considerations of the effect which, it might have upon the temper or disposition of the unhappy creatures who were doomed to endure it: I have myself known instances some few years ago, of persons who, for the offence of uttering seditious wards, have, at courts of quarter sessions, been sentenced to two years of solitary imprisonment. It has been justly observed, that those are the best punishments which inflict the least suffering upon the convict, but inspire the most terror in others. The punishment of solitary imprisonment just reverses this rule, and no uneducated and unreflecting individual can conceive before hand all the horror of that new mode of existence, by which he is suddenly cut off from all the rest of mankind, and left in a state of total silence and seclusion. In many instances it is said to have produced despair and madness; it is a punishment too easily abused if it be solely left to the discretion of justices of the peace. Solitary confinement, for very short periods, and as a mode of compelling the most hardened and daring offenders to submit to the rules and discipline of their prisons, may, upon occasion, and for very short periods, be advantageously resorted to; but to make solitude itself a punishment, accompanied with idleness, and that for certain long and definite periods of time, cannot in my opinion, under any circumstances be justified. The House will, I hope, not think that I am trespassing improperly on their patience, if I take this opportunity to mention, that lately persons have been authorised by law in this country, to inflict solitary imprisonment as a punishment, where a very slight, or perhaps no offence at all, may have been committed. An act of parliament has very, recently passed through this and the other House of Parliament as a private bill, and without the attention of any of the members being called to it in any of its stages, the Lambeth poor bill, by which power is given to any one churchwarden or overseer of the poor, to punish any of the paupers who may be maintained in the workhouse, for the offence of profane cursing or swearing, or for using abusive language, or disobeying the reasonable commands of any person put in authority over them, or any other misbehaviour, with corporal punish- ment, or with confinement in the workhouse, which being itself in a great degree a place of confinement, must necessarily be solitary imprisonment, for any time not exceeding 48 hours. After the bill had passed, the injustice which it had done was called into notice, and a right hon. friend of mine (Mr. Sheridan,) gave notice of a motion on the subject, which from probably not knowing how after the bill had passed, the evil could in this session be remedied, he has as I understand abandoned. The fact however, Sir, is that however unjust this may be, it is not the first time that the legislature has been guilty of such injustice.—Many acts have passed of late years, by which this species of penal law has been enacted for individual parishes, varying, indeed, in their circumstances according to the fancy of the person who has drawn the bill, but all in the same spirit. In some the power of imprisonment, or corporal punishment, is given to parish-officers; in some to guardians of the poor; in some to the keepers of workhouses. In some of those bills, the power of solitary imprisonment is given in express terms, in some the term of imprisonment is defined, in others it is unlimited. In the act for the parish of Hampstead, the 39 and 40th of the King, power is given to the master or mistress of the workhouse to punish any person there maintained, who shall be guilty of profane swearing, or of using any abusive or improper language, with solitary confinement, and that for an unlimited period, and without any other controul than that it is to be subject to the approbation of the guardians of the poor. If this were confined to the offence of swearing, the enormous severity of it could not fail to strike every one. For the same misdemeanor, a gentleman is punished with a fine only of five shillings, and a poor wretch, who has been without education or instruction, and has been compelled by his necessities to associate with those amongst whom these depraved habits generally prevail, is to be punished with the most severe penalty of solitary imprisonment. But what is to be said when this injustice is extended so far, that what, in the judgment of the master of a work-house, may be deemed abusive or improper language, or misbehaviour, no matter to whom, whether to some servant of the house, or to an inmate like himself, with whom he may happen to have quarrelled, is to expose him to such severity. If this is to be the state of our penal law, enacted only for the most friendless and unprotected part of the community, at least it ought to be done by public statutes, to which the attention of this House should be drawn. This evil appears to me to be one of sufficient magnitude to occupy the most serious care of this House, and I shall probably in some future session bring it distinctly under their consideration. The remedy most likely to be effectual, would probably be to come to a resolution that no bill should pass this House, containing any clause, giving power to parish officers, or guardians, or trustees of the poor, or governors or masters of poor-houses, to inflict corporal punishment or imprisonment, which had not first been submitted to a committee of the whole House. This however, must be the subject of future consideration, and I hope that the House will not think that I have improperly wasted their time in noticing what I cannot but consider as the wrongs of those who have such imperfect means of making their sufferings known. To return, however, to the immediate subject of this debate, let me conjure the House to reflect how much time has passed since the legislature enacted that penitentiary houses should be erected, that although the ground for erecting them has been bought at great expence to the public, nothing effectual towards establishing them has yet been done. That the want of them in the mean time is every day more sensibly felt, that other punishments are found to be ineffectual, that crimes have become more frequent, offenders more daring and desperate, public morals more outraged, and the laws more despised, and then to say whether we ought to persevere in the system which has hitherto been followed, and whether we ought to defer, even though it be only to another session, a measure from which so much good is to be expected.

The House then divided, and the numbers stood thus: Ayes 52, Noes 69.

Majority against the motion 17.

than moved a Resolution, which was carried without opposition, and is in these words: "Resolved, That this House will, early in the next session of parliament, take into consideration the means of most beneficially carrying into effect the acts of the 19th and 34th years of his present Majesty's reign, for the establishment and regulation of Penitentiary Houses."