state of these secondary punishments, or on the degree of improvement of which they may be found capable. The object of the Committee has been to ascertain, as far as the nature of the case admitted by evidence, whether, in the present state of the sentiments of the people of England, capital punishment in most cases of offences unattended with violence, be a necessary, or even the most effectual security against the prevalence of crimes. The deputy clerk of assize for the home circuit, has laid before the Committee, a return of commitments, convictions, and executions on that circuit, which comprehends the counties of Herts, Essex, Kent, Sussex, and Surrey, from 1689 to 1718, from 1755 to 1784, and from 1784 to 1814. The returns of the intermediate period, from 1718 to 1755, he will doubtless furnish very soon. From this important return it appears, that, for the first thirty years which followed the revolution, the average proportion of convictions to executions was 38 to 20; that from 1755 to 1784, it was 46 to 13; and that from 1784 to 1814, it was 74 to 19. It is worthy of remark, that the whole number of convictions for murder, on the home circuit, in the first period was 123; that the executions for the same period were 87: that in the second, the convictions for the same offence were 67, and the executions 57; and that in the third, the convictions were 54, and the executions 44. If the increase of the population, during a prosperous period of a hundred and thirty years, be taken into the account, and if we bear in mind that within that time a considerable city has grown up on the southern bank of the Thames, we shall be disposed to consider it as no exaggeration to affirm, that in this district (not one of the most favourably situated in this respect) murder has abated in the remarkable proportion of three, if not four, to one. In the thirty years from 1755 to 1784, the whole convictions for mur. der in London and Middlesex were 71; and in the thirty years from 1784 to 1814, they were 66. In the years 1815, 1816, and 1817, the whole con victions for murder in London were 9, while in the three preceding years they were 14. Most of the other returns re late to too short a period, or too nar row a district, to afford materials for safe conclusion with respect to the comparative frequency of crimes at different periods. In general, however, it appears that murders, and other crimes of violence and cruelty, have either diminished, or not increased; and that the deplorable increase of criminals is not of such a nature as to indicate any diminution in the humanity of the people. The practice of immediately publishing the circumstances of every atrocious crime, and of circulating in various forms an account of every stage of the proceed ings which relate to it, is far more pre valent in England than in any other country, and in our times than in any former age. It is on the whole of great utility, not only as a control on courts of judicature, but also as a means of rendering it extremely difficult for odious criminals to escape. The statutes creating capital felo nies, which the Committee have considered, are reducible to two classes; the first relates to acts either so nearly indifferent as to require no penalty, or if injurious, not of such a magnitude as that they may not safely be left punishable as misdemeanors at common law. In these the Committee propose the repeal; they are as follows: 1.-1 and 2 Phil. and Mary, c. 4. Egyptians remaining within the kingdom one month. 2.-18 Charles II, c. 3. Notori in any warren. Being armed heath, com 5.-9 Geo. I, c. 22. in any high road, open mon, or down. 6.-9 Geo. I, c. 22. Unlawfully bunting, killing, or stealing deer. 7.-9 Geo. I, c. 22. Robbing warrens, &c. 8.-9 Geo. I, c. 22. Stealing or taking any fish out of any river or pond, &c. 9.-9 Geo. I, c, 22. Hunting in his Majesty's forests or chases. 10.-9 Geo. I, c. 22. Breaking down the head or mound of a fish pond. 11.-9 Geo. I, c. 28. guised within the Mint. Being dis 12.-12 Geo. II, c. 29. Injuring of Westminster-bridge, and other bridges by other acts. The second class consists of those offences, which, though in the opinion of the Committee never fit to be punished with death, are yet so malignant and dangerous as to require the highest punishments except death, which are known to our laws. These the Committee would make punishable, either by transportation, or imprisonment with hard labour, allowing considerable scope to the discretion of the judges respecting the term for which either punishment is to endure. 1.-31 Eliz. c. 9. Taking away any maid, widow, or wife, &c. 2.-21 Jac. I, c. 26. Acknowledging or procuring any fine, recovery, &c. 3.—4 Geo. I, c. 2, s. 4. Helping to the recovery of stolen goods. 4.-9 Geo. I, c. 22. Maliciously killing or wounding cattle. 5.-9 Geo. I, c. 22. Cutting down or destroying trees growing, &c. 11.-27 Geo. II, c. 15. Sending threatening letters. 12.-27 Geo. II, c. 19. Destroying bank, &c. Bedford level. 13.-3 Geo. III, c. 16. Personating out-pensioners of Greenwich hospital. 14.-22 Geo. III, c. 40. Maliciously cutting serges. 15.-24 Geo. III, c. 47. Harbour. ing offenders against that (revenue) act, when returned from transportation. It does not seem necessary to make any observations in this place on the punishments of transportation and imprisonment, which the Committee have proposed to substitute for that of death in the second of the two classes above mentioned. In their present imperfect state they are sufficient for such offences; and in the more improved condition in which the Committee trust that all the prisons of the kingdom will soon be placed, imprisonment may be hoped to be of such a nature as to answer every purpose of terror and reformation. On the three capital felonies of, privately stealing in a shop to the amount of five shillings-of, privately stealing in a dwelling-house to the amount of forty shillings and of, privately stealing from vessels in a navigable river to the amount of forty shillings,-the House of Commons have pronounced their opinion, by passing Bills for reducing the punishment to transportation or imprisonment. In proposing to revive those bills, your Committee feel a singular satisfaction that they are enabled to present to the House so considerable a body of direct evidence in support of opinions, which had hitherto chiefly rested on general reasoning, and were often alleged by their opponents to be contradicted by experience. Numerous and respectable witnesses have borne testimony, for themselves and for the classes whom they represent, that a great reluctance prevails to prosecute, to give evidence, and to convict, in the cases of the three last-mentioned offences; and that this reluctance has had the effect of producing impunity to such a degree, that it may be considered as among the temptations to the commission of crimes. But highly as the Committee esteem and respect the Judges, it is not from them that the most accurate and satisfactory evidence of the effect of the penal law can reasonably be expected. They only see the exterior of criminal proceedings after they are brought into a court of justice. Of the cases which never appear there, and of the causes which prevent their appearance, they can know nothing. Of the motives which influence the testimony of witnesses, they can form but a hasty and inadequate estimate. Even in the grounds of verdicts, they may often be deceived. From any opportunity of observing the influence of punishment upon those classes of men among whom malefactors are most commonly found, the judges are, by their stations and duties, placed at a great dis tance. The Committee have sought for evidence on these subjects from those classes of men who are sufferers from larcenies, who must be prosecutors where these larcenies are brought to trial-who are the witnesses by whom such charges must be substantiated and who are the jurors, by whose verdicts only effect can be given to the laws. Mr Shelton, who has been near forty years clerk of arraigns at the Old Bailey, states, that juries are anxious to reduce the value of property below its real amount, in those larcenies where the capital punishment depends lue; that they are desirous of omitting those circumstances on which the ca pital punishment depends in construc tive burglaries; and that a reluctance to convict is perceptible in forgery. Sir Archibald Macdonald bears tes timony to the reluctance of prosecu tors, witnesses, and juries, in forgeries, in shop-lifting, and offences of a like nature. He believes that the chances of escape are greatly increased by the severity of the punishments. "Against treason, murder, arson, rape, and crimes against the dwelling-house or person, and some others," he thinks, "the pu nishment of death should be directed." T. W. Carr, Esq. solicitor of excise, a very intelligent public officer, gave an important testimony, directly appli cable, indeed, only to offences against the revenue, but throwing great light on the general tendency of severity in penal laws to defeat its own purpose. From his extensive experience it ap pears, that severe punishment has rendered the law on that subject ineffica cious. Prosecutions and convictions were easy when breaches of the law were subject to moderate pecuniary pe nalties; even a great pecuniary penalty has been found so favourable to impu nity, that fraudulent traders prefer it to a moderate penalty. The act of counterfeiting a stamp in certain cases, within the laws of excise, was, before the year 1806, subject only to a penalty of 500l. ; but in that year it was a transportable offence; of which the consequence was, that the convictions, which, from 1794 to 1806, had been 19 made The Reverend Mr Cotton, Ordinary of Newgate, has described in strong terms, the repugnance of the public to capital execution in offences unattended with violence, and the acquiescence even of the most depraved classes in their infliction in atrocious crimes. Mr Colquhoun, for twenty-seven years a police magistrate in this capital, and well known by his publications on these subjects, declares his firm conviction, that capital punishment in the minor offences operates powerfully in preventing convictions; and that there is a great reluctance to prosecute in forgery, shoplifting, larceny in the dwelling-house, burglary without actual entry, horse-stealing, sheep-stealing, cattle-stealing, frame-breaking, house-breaking in the day time, robbery without acts of violence, and other minor offences, now subject to the punishment of death. According to the testimony of this intelligent observer, the public mind revolts at capital punishment in cases not atrocious. Mr Newman, late keeper of Newgate, and connected with the administration of justice in London for forty years, gave testimony to the same effect. Mr Basil Montague stated a fact of a most striking nature, immediately applicable only to one offence, but shewing those dispositions in the minds of the public, which must produce similar effects wherever the general feeling is at variance with the provisions of criminal law. From the year 1732, when embezzlement of property by a bankrupt was made a capital offence, there have been probably forty thousand bankruptcies; in that period there have not been more than ten prosecutions, and three executions for the capital offence, and yet fraudulent bankruptcies have become so common as almost to be supposed to have lost the nature of crime. Mr Hobler, clerk to the Lord Mayor, and to the sitting magistrate in London for thirty years, stated the anxiety of prosecutors to lower the value of goods stolen; and has observed many cases of forgery, in which, after the clearest evidence before the magistrate, the grand jury has thrown out the bill for some reason or other, where the magistrate had no doubt. The same solicitude to reduce the value of articles privately stolen in shops and dwelling houses, has been remarked by Mr Payne, clerk to the sitting magistrate at Guildhall; by Mr Yardley, clerk at the office in Worship-street, who has observed a disinclination to prosecute in all capital cases, except murder; and who says, that in larcenies he has often heard prosecutors, especially females, say, "I hope it is not a hanging matter;" and by Mr Thompson, clerk at the office in Whitechapel, who represents it as common for prosecutors in larcenies to ask, "Cannot this be put under forty shillings?" Mr Alderman Wood, a member of the House, an active magistrate, and two successive years Lord Mayor of London, has strongly stated the unwillingness of shop-keepers and others to prosecute the number of offenders who, during his mayoralty, owed their escape to this cause; and his decided conviction, that if the capital punishment was taken away, the reluctance to prosecute would be greatly abated. Mr Wilkinson, a merchant in Lon don, stated a case of property to the value of one thousand pounds stolen from him, where he was deterred from prosecution by the capital punishment; and expressed his belief that a similar disposition prevailed among persons of the like condition and occupation with himself. Mr Josiah Conder, bookseller, Mr Joseph Curtis, currier, Mr Wendover Fry, type-founder, and Mr John Gaun, a merchant and shoe-manufacturer, stated instances in which they were prevented by the capital punishment from prosecuting offenders, whom they would have brought to justice if the punishment had, in their opinion, been more proportioned to the crime. They also declared, that there is a general disinclination to prosecute among the traders of the city of London, or to convict in thefts without violence, and in forgeries. Sir Richard Phillips, a bookseller in London, and once sheriff, as well as often a juror, has in these several capacities observed the same facts. Mr Richard Taylor, a commoncouncilman, prosecuted some men for breaking into his printing-office, and stealing some property out of it, for which they were transported, but whom he would not have prosecuted if he had not previously ascertained that the connexion of the printing-office with the dwelling-house was not such as to make the act a capital offence. Mr Richard Martin, a member of the House, informed the Committee, that the punishment of death prevented prosecutions in Ireland for horse, cattle, and sheep-stealing, for privately stealing in dwelling-houses and shops, and in general for all larcenies without violence. Though the extensive estate, of which he is proprietor, be almost laid waste by sheep-stealing, he has been prevented from prosecuting by the punishment of death. If the punishment were reduced to transportation, he would certainly prosecute the offenders to conviction. He has no doubt that his estate would be better protected if the law were more lenient; and that the reduction of the penalties of the law would promote the security of property throughout the province of Connaught. Mr James Soaper, of Saint Helen's Place, Mr Ebenezer Johnson, of Bishopsgate-street, ironmonger, Mr Baker, of the Tower, Mr Lewis, a reti. red merchant, and Mr Garrett, an insurance-broker, bore testimony to the general repugnance to prosecution which arose from capital punishment; some of them mentioned instances in which they had been deterred by that consideration from bringing offenders to justice. Mr Garrett said, that as far as his observation went, there was not one in twenty who did not shudder at the idea of inflicting the capital pu nishment in cases of forgery. Messrs Frederic and William Thornhill, hardwaremen, mentioned cases of theft in which they had forborne to prosecute on account of the punishment of death. The former added, that he found it to be an almost universal sentiment among his neighbours and acquaintances, that excessive punishment tends very greatly to the production of crime; that he knows many persons who have been great sufferers by thefts in shops and dwelling-houses, and who declare, that if the punishment of such offences had been any thing less than death, they would have regarded it as highly cri minal in themselves to have forborne prosecution, which they had felt themselves compelled to abstain from in every instance on account of the punishment, and must continue to act on the same principle of forbearance till there was an amendment in the law. He also informed the Committee, that from his knowledge of a great variety |