moved the order of the day for going into Committee on the Prisons Bill.

wished to direct the attention of the House to the expediency of extending the system of separate confinement to prisoners both before and after trial. According to the present plan to be settled by the Bill the worst offender committing a small crime would be sent to the same gaol as the juvenile offender, which would have all the ill effects of the present system.

thought, that it would be better to effect gradually the various improvements which might be made in the system to be introduced after the Bill had passed. If an absolute rule as to separate confinement were at once laid down, it might excite an outcry against the bill, and he would rather postpone the carrying out of this plan than run the risk of obstructing the beneficial operation of the whole system by laying down too extensive a design at the commencement.

said, it had been found in Glasgow and in the United States to be beneficial that prisoners should have labour offered to them in their cells during confinement, and the stimulus of hoping to earn something from that labour. He thought if Government turned their attention to some provision for prisoners after liberation it would go a great way towards effecting the diminution of crime.

thought it would become the Government in a question of such immense importance, and involving such a large outlay, to erect a prison on the separate system at the public expense, within a reasonable distance of the metropolis, so that it might be frequently visited. It would be better to do so, before the whole country was required to enter into a large outlay for the reconstructing of prisons.

entertained a strong opinion on the question of separate and solitary confinement, and he thought the result, if it could be fairly brought before the House, would prove the utter inefficiency of attempting to reform individuals by imprisonment. If there should be societies whose care was directed to the providing of employment for those who had been confined this would be offering a premium to crime, and there would not be the same opportunity offered to individuals who had not incurred the censure of the law, but were equally anxious for employment. Out of the prisoners tried in London every year there were more than one-third who had been in confinement during the preceding year, and yet Government were now entering on a most expensive process, and calling on the people in every part of the country to enlarge the prisons. His opinion was that nothing but transportation could afford any chance of these individuals obtaining a livelihood by their industry. He thought the measure was of much more importance to the country as regarded its expenditure than was generally supposed. He was aware that a difference of opinion existed relative to transportation, but it appeared to him that that question should be set at rest before the country embarked in a large expenditure. His opinion was, that transportation was the best plan for reclaiming criminals, inasmuch as it removed them from the place where they had forfeited their station in society, and would afford them an opportunity in a place where they were not known of reclaiming their characters if they were honestly disposed. If they were not honestly disposed, all the solitary confinement in the world would be useless. It was well known that three-fourths of those who came out of prison, again resorted to thieving and stealing for a livelihood. He thought that the practice that existed in Scotland of banishment for minor offences, and allowing the man to go where he pleased—would be advantageous. On these grounds he objected entirely to the present proposition.

The House resolved itself into a Committee.

On the sixth clause,

rose to suggest to the noble Lord that this clause should be struck out altogether, unless the noble Lord was prepared to say, that boroughs and counties were unable to raise money at a fair rate of interest. If they were unable to do that, he would then say let Exchequer bills be issued, but he thought this clause ought altogether to be struck out of the bill.

said, that if the clause were struck out the hon. Member for Kilkenny would not gain the object he wished.

said, the issue of Exchequer-bills bad first been resorted to as a measure of necessity in a time of commercial difficulty, but it had of late become an ordinary matter of business. The transactions of the Government ought to be kept separate from those of private individuals.

said, the hon. Member for Kilkenny wished the Government not to interfere with private speculations; but this was not a private speculation. It was a public undertaking, which the public ought to assist, and in which private individuals might not be willing to embark their money.

thought this clause gave the Government the power of burthening the general revenue of the country to a great extent for enforcing this extensive system on the country.

said, the Government had not the power of levying funds for the carrying out of this system till called upon to do so by the magistrates. To his hon. Friends who objected to the bill that it would lead to expense, he would only say, that when the design of the bill was so important as the diminution of crime, and the prevention of moral con- tamination in the gaols, pecuniary considerations ought not to be urged. The only way to attain these great objects was boldly to take measures for that end, without the fear of encountering a very large expenditure—and if, at every step, they were to be met by objections as to expense, these objects would never be effected.

said, it appeared, from a return which had been made to a motion of his, that 700,000l. additional expense had been incurred by the increased interest on Exchequer-bills, while 300,000l. had been raised in the county of Middlesex with the greatest ease—certainly at an interest of 4 or 4½ per cent. Exchequer-bills at this moment bore a higher rate of interest than ever was borne in proportion to the amount of money in the market, and they were at 67s. and 70s premium in consequence of that high rate of interest. Was it not too much that they should be obliged to pay on twenty millions of Exchequer-bills that large increased interest, merely because from mismanagement there was an excess of two or three millions? The hon. Member for Lambeth said this ought not to be a matter of pounds, shillings and pence—that where the expense was intended for the reformation of offenders the House ought not to be niggardly. But the hon. Member was wrong in principle. If money could not be raised in any other way, he was willing to advance it, but whilst money was in abundance, it was wrong, on principle, to raise it in this manner, and he should take the sense of the Committee on the subject.

thought the Government would be better employed in relieving the public from taxes than imposing on them an additional expense for the building of prisons.

The House divided on the clause. Ayes 96; Noes 18:—Majority 78.

On clause 10, which regulated the appointment of Chaplains,

begged to call the attention of the noble Lord to the situation in which Roman Catholics imprisoned were placed in respect of religious instruction. He believed, that a very large proportion, as much as one-third or one-fourth, of the prisoners in this metropolis were members of this profession. He thought, therefore, that every means ought to be afforded them of obtaining religious con- solation from spiritual advisers of the same persuasion.

said, that the general rule was, that when prisoners asked to see a particular minister, the justices made an order that such party should be allowed admission to the prisoner. It would be attended with much inconvenience, if benevolent persons were allowed at any time to lecture all the prisoners, and therefore the rule was laid down, that when a prisoner desired the attendance of a particular clergyman, his visits should be allowed.

observed, that Roman Catholic clergymen ought to have the right of visiting such of their flock as might chance to be in prison at periodical times.

thought the suggestion of the hon. Member entitled him to a good deal of consideration. He had no claim to put in on behalf of the dissenters, who were not often to be found within the precincts of the prisons.

Clause agreed to.

Remaining clauses were agreed to; and the House having resumed, the report was brought up.