three-fourths of the forgeries committed in the City of London are never prosecuted! So does a vindictive law defeat the ends of justice!-Morning Herald, Wednesday, March 24, 1830. Mr. Secretary PEEL's new Forgery Bill. Any Bill brought into Parliament by a Minister of the Crown to alter and amend the laws which inflict capital punishment for forgery, we regard as an indication of the approaching triumph of sound and enlightened principles of justice over the spirit of a barbarous legislation. There are many who consider such a measure as only a reluctant concession to a more humane policy, extorted from power by public opinion; but we care not, so long as improvement take place, whether it was originally suggested by those who have the power of carrying it into effect, or whether the reputation of such reformers is founded on the borrowed ' and to save this very man from transportation, his Lordship would not ' have advanced a farthing, or spoken a word. I have been induced to take the liberty of troubling your Lord'ship with these remarks, to shew that, although prosecutions may, 'and, no doubt, will increase, for some short time at least, after the 'abolition of the punishment of death for forgery, still that circumstance 'ought not to be considered as a demonstration that the lessening the "punishment has increased the number of forgeries.' On the contrary, 'I should consider it as strongly proving the utility of the mitigation, ⚫ because punishment would become more certain, and the law conse'quently more effective. 'I have the honour to be, MY LORD, "Your Lordship's obedient and very humble Servant, "The Most Noble the Marquis of Lansdowne.' [The proposition of the writer in the Morning Herald, (March 15, 1830) is therefore capable of being established, we think, to the satisfaction of posterity. To adopt his words,- These facts prove that we have a Criminal Code which is equally cruel and impracticable.'-ED.] wisdom of others. It has been our own lot to be for years engaged in endeavouring, as often as occasion offered, to draw the attention of parliament and the public to the sanguinary nature of our Criminal Law. The infliction of death for forgery, among others, we have repeatedly deprecated as disproportionate to the offence, repugnant to humanity, and opposed to the interests of justice. The power of public opinion has been, in the meantime, working its way through society, and continually adding to the number of those who look to the amelioration of the criminal code as one of the greatest triumphs which civilization has yet to achieve. On this subject not less than about sixty petitions have been presented to the House of Commons, in the present session, from various cities, towns, and districts in England, besides the petition from the Society of Friends in Ireland, which Mr. PEEL presented the other night. All these petitions were respectably and numerously signed; and, what is well worth observing in reference to petitions praying for an abolition of capital punishments in cases of forgery, they were signed by the Bankers generally of the places from which they purported to come. It is also a strong attestation of the improved state of public feeling on this question, that the Magistrates and Clergy, in a considerable proportion, were among the petitioners. Having stated thus much, we will ask, is Mr. PEEL'S Bill relative to forgery calculated to satisfy the advocates of rational and enlightened justice, so far as that branch of the Criminal Law is concerned? and will it obviate all necessity for further petitioning on that particular question? We confidently say it will do no such thing. What is it Mr. PEEL proposes to do? Let us hear himself:-He should retain the capital punishment in all forgeries of the Great Seal, Privy Seal, and Sign Manual, in forgeries of wills, on the public funds, of bank and money notes, or orders for the payment of money; in short, as to all documents which represent money, and are negotiable and transferrable for it. He would remit the capital punishment in all those cases where serious doubts overhung its infliction, and where the complainants by due caution could have saved themselves, such as forging receipts for money, orders for the delivery of goods, forging stamps, uttering forged stamps, attempting to defraud by uttering forged orders for goods, the fabrication of the material of the Bank of England paper, and forging deeds and bonds.' As to all these forgeries Mr. PEEL proposes to remit the capital punishment, because, he says, they come within the principle of prevention by the exercise of more diligence and caution in the transactions of business. Now as to all practical purposes, we affirm Mr. PEEL'S Bill will leave the law of forgery just where it found it. For he only proposes to erase the punishment of death from the Statute-book in cases where the sentence of death is never actually carried into execution; and to leave the sanguinary law in all its force in those cases which are ever productive of the cruel and revolting exhibitions which humanity deplores, and rational justice condemns. In the debate of Thursday night, Mr. F. BUXTON is made to compliment Mr. PEEL for the improvements which he had introduced into the Criminal Law. This, we understand, was a mistake; Mr. BUXTON's eulogy on Mr. PEEL's exertions having reference only to his regulations for the better government of gaols, and nothing else. We knew that Mr. BUXTON had been an advocate for a thorough reform of the criminal code, in which he delivered, during a former debate, one of the best speeches of the kind ever delivered in the House of Commons; and we were therefore surprised to hear that he expressed something like satisfaction at the very limited amendment' of the law executed by Mr. PEEL. We now say what we have repeatedly said before-that the punishment of death in all cases of forgery must be abolished.-Morning Herald, Saturday, April 3, 1830. Presentation of a Petition against the Forgery Laws by the BISHOP of LONDON. We are glad to observe that the BISHOP Of LONDON, in presenting two petitions to the House of Lords, on Friday night, from certain persons in London and Northamptonshire, praying for the abolition of the punishment of death in cases of forgery, stated his acquiescence in the prayer of the petitions, and expressed a hope soon to see capital punishments effaced from the Statute-book altogether, except in cases of great atrocity.* This sentiment is worthy of one who is a chief among the Pastors of the Church, to whom his less exalted brethren look up for instruction and example, and whose high station imposes on him the greater responsibility of diffusing the true principles of Christianity among the people.-Morning Herald, Monday, April 5, 1830. Petition against the Forgery Laws from the Liberty of In another part of our columns will be found a copy of the petition of the Inhabitant Householders of the Liberty of * I have no criterion,' said Sir Samuel ROMILLY, 'and the learned • author has furnished me with none, by which to determine how death 'is deserved.' This remark will be found in his admirable refutation of the unsound and unchristian doctrines of expediency resorted to by PALEY, in defending the punishment of death. Speaking of that writer, ROMILLY says, there is none whose arguments deserve more ' attention than Dr. PALEY, not so much on account of the force or 'ingenuity of those arguments, as of the weight which they derive 'from the respectable name of the writer who uses them. Every 'thing that is excellent in the works of such a man, renders his errors, ⚫ where he falls into error, only the more pernicious. Sanctioned by his high authority, they are received implicity as truths by many persons who, if they met with them in a writer of inferior merit or reputa'tion, would not fail to canvass them, and to detect their fallacy.' -(Substance of Sir Samuel Romilly's speech in the Commons, Feb. 9, 1810.) 6 the Tower of London, lately presented to the House of Lords, praying for an abolition of the penalty of death in cases of forgery; and for a revision of the laws inflicting capital punishment in general. The language of this petition is temperate, but strong— its arguments solid and convincing. It bespeaks as much intelligence as humanity, and with equal simplicity and force advocates principles that cannot fail to have the sanction of enlightened public opinion. Among other things, the petitioners say 6 < They deplore the frequency of capital punishments, the number of 'criminals executed in England and Wales in seven years (ending ⚫ with 1826) being 528, or an average of 75 every year-that these 'sanguinary examples do not appear to produce the intended effect ' of repressing crime, the number of capital convictions in the same 'period having been 7,656, or an average of 1,093 every year-that 'this relaxed execution of the law, in inflicting the sentence upon one only in fourteen convicted offenders, tends to encourage the 'commission of crime, by the uncertainty of punishment.' Criminal Law than the laxity It is this uncertainty of punishment which tends to encourage crime far more than occasional acts of terrible and unjust severity can repress it. There can be no more bitter satire upon the cruelty of the of its execution. The penalty of death allotted by law to various crimes is not carried into effect in the great majority of instances, because human nature revolts at its barbarity, and the very Judge before whom the culprit is convicted, feels an irresistible repugnance to enforce the sentence which it is his duty to pronounce or record. Where, of the vast number whom the law annually condemns to death, but one in fourteen is executed, all criminals are encouraged to entertain a hope that, notwithstanding the ferocious spirit of the law, they shall escape its severity; and, on the other hand, the apprehension that life may be taken for an offence for which man's blood ought not to be shed, deters humane and considerate people from coming |