possessed by other gentlemen, but it having been argued that the principle on which his motion was grounded was more objectionable than the individual propo sition submitted to the House, from the extent to which it might be carried, he' had now stated it to be his intention to confine himself to the measures he had announced, and not to push the principle to a dangerous length. which they proceeded might become injurious by extension. He thought it fair to consider the proposition on its own merits, and rather to oppose the principle when it should appear about to be carried too far, than to give opposition at present, because the principle might hereafter be pushed to objectionable extent. He concluded by expressing himself content that the Bills should be brought in, but repeating, that it was his wish that those who so gave their assent, should not be considered as pledging themselves to afford them their future support. Sir S. Romilly thought his right hon. friend had forgot one of his reasons for thinking his bill had been of public utility. He had said first, that more had been brought to trial; and secondly, that more of those tried had been convicted. Now could there be any reason for imputing prejudice to him, when he spoke of his bill as having done good on the last-mentioned ground? Was it possible to account for the circumstance of 19 being acquitted and one found guilty out of 20 tried before the passing of the Bill, and 19 being convicted and one acquitted out of 20 tried after it had passed, but by supposing the prosecutors, witnesses, and jury to have done their duty in the one instance and not in the other, and that the change arose from the good effects of the law. On the first ground he also disclaimed prejudice; and contended, that the increase of prosecutors could not solely arise from the number of offences being greater than formerly. The Chancellor of the Exchequer reminded his hon. and learned friend, that he had supposed the offences to be committed with a greater degree of hardihood and less dread of the consequences than before, and thence accounted for the facility of conviction. Mr. D. Giddy stated the grounds on which he had thought it his duty to oppose the Bill of the hon. and learned gent. in the last session. Without being more deficient in humanity than others, he might feel it right to oppose the principle on which it was grounded, if it should appear about to be pushed too far. Whatever he might feel on this subject, he could not object to the Bill being brought in. Mr. Ponsonby thought his hon. and learned friend had been misunderstood. He did not take credit to himself for more feeling and more humanity than were VOL. XVIII. The Solicitor General observed, that his hon. and learned friend had stated there had been a greater number of prosecutions since the passing of his bills than before, and thence inferred, that witnesses and prosecutors came forward more readily, from a knowledge that the offence of which individuals were accused, was not to be punished by death, and that hence much benefit was derived to the community. This circumstance, which had been so brought forward, he thought extremely equivocal. From a salutary measure he should have hoped that such offences would have less frequently occurred, but when it was found that they were more numerous than formerly, the trials at least (which was one proof of the number of offences committed), he should be inclined to draw an inference very different from that drawn by his hon. and learned friend, and fear that instead of good, the measure had been productive of evil. But then the hon. and learned gent. had said, how was his second assertion to be answered, that of those tried a greater number had been convicted? To this he would reply, that the taking away the distinction respecting privately stealing, and making the effect the same whether the theft came under that denomination or not, might give greater facility to conviction. It was difficult to get correct information on the subject, as to the causes which had led to the effect spoken of by the hon. and learned gentleman. It could only be procured from those who were most concerned in trying for that species of offence. Offenders of the description alluded to, pickpockets, &c. might well be supposed to be most numerous in London and its vicinity, and those before whom such cases were decided, most competent to decide on the question, whether or not that species of crime had been diminished. He was sorry to say that on inquiry, he found those who had most experience, were of opinion, that the number of such offences was not diminished, but was become more frequent than before from its 4 M being known they were no longer punished Sir S. Romilly, in explanation, said, that strictly as doing his duty. He had no INDEX Proxies, 786, 805, 976. Regency; Resolutions respecting Capital Punishments in Revenue King's Illness, 1, 6, 43, 120, 127, Report from the Lords' Commit Catholics of Ireland-Mr. Wel- liament, 812. 193, 202, 387, 466. Lords Commissioners' Speech on 1146. tee appointed to examine the INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. ADDRESS to the Prince of Wales: | Examination of the King's Phy- | Private Bills, 851. and to the Queen, 803, 805- Bank Notes, Bullion, &c.; Mo- Call of the House, 241, 477, 851. sicians, 78. Execution of a Convict, 830. Finance Committee, 920. Privately Stealing Bill, 1261. Clarence, H. R. H. the Duke of, Coventry, Earl of, 1048. 1155, 1167. Harrowby, Earl of, 52, 54, 397, 732. Holland, Lord, 3, 54, 200, 229, 1229. Derby, Earl of, 1091. Eliot, Lord, 1154. Fitzwilliam, Earl, 240. Gloucester, Duke of, 1068. Lansdowne, Marquis of, 75, 240, Limerick, Earl of, 1230, 1232. 796, 829, 976, 985, 998, 1001, Mansfield, Earl of, 983. Redesdale, Lord, 465, 795, 999, Sussex, H. R. H. the Duke of, 75, 419, 1031. Westmoreland, Earl of, 58, 66, York, H. R. H. the Duke of, 428. INDEX OF NAMES.-HOUSE OF COMMONS. ABBOT, CHARLES, see SPEAKER. Bankes, Henry, 920, 921. Brand, Thomas, 936. Dundas, Robert Saunders, 774, 498, 547, 573, 584, 665, 872, | Desart, Lord, 571. Ellison, Richard, 663. 808, 815, 816, 817, 818, 822, Creevey, Thomas, 1216, 1250. Canning, George, 34, 36, 280, Croker, John Wilson, 311. Folkestone, Viscount, 1221, 1241, Faller, John, 31, 118, 573, 876, Gibbs, Sir Vicary, see Attorney Giddy, Davies, 1265. Grant, Charles, 1252. Wallace, Thomas, 1253. 193, 321, 377, 381, 584, 672, Yorke, Charles, 94, 353, 617, END OF VOL. XVIII. Printed by T. C. Hansard, Peterborough-Court, |