GENERAL HISTORY. 



[.-37 



ham." Leavewasaccordingly grant- 

 ed, and the two bills were brought 

 in and read the first time. 



Mr. Herbert then moved, " That 

 a committee be appointed to in- 

 quire into the late riots in the 

 county of Nottingham and the 

 neiglibouring counties, and what 

 further legal provisions, if any, are 

 necessary for the suppression there- 

 of, and also the steps which have 

 been taken for the discovery of the 

 offenders." 



Mr. Secietary Ryder argued 

 against the appointment of a com- 

 mittee as wholly unnecessary ; and 

 on a division, the motion was ne- 

 gatived by 40 against 15. 



On Feb. 17, Mr. Ryder having 

 moved for the second reading of 

 the bill for the more exemplary pu- 

 nishment of frame-breaking, &c. 

 Mr. Abercromby rose to declare 

 his objections to the bill, chiefly 

 on the ground of its being ineffec- 

 tual for its purpose. He was fol- 

 lowed by several speakers on both 

 sides, whose arguments differed 

 little from those advanced on the 

 former reading. Sir Samuel Ro- 

 milly, whose attention had already 

 been particularly directed to capi- 

 tal punishments, took a leading 

 part in opposition to the bill. He 

 s-aid, it was folly to talk of the ter- 

 ror that would arise from convert- 

 ing the punishment of transporta- 

 tion for fourteen years into that of 

 death ; the one would always have 

 almost an equal influence upon the 

 human mind with the other, and 

 he would answer for it, that this 

 terror would not tend to diminish 

 the evil. If the existence of this 

 evil were to be attributed to a con- 

 spiracy for suppressing evidence, 

 the terror of a greater punishment 

 would tend the more to keep wit- 



nesses from coming forward. The 

 bill was totally directed against 

 individual depredation, and not 

 against the conspiracy which had 

 given birth to the disturbances. 

 He complained of the want of exa- 

 mination and inquiry; and said, 

 that in after-times it would asto- 

 nish an English House of Com- 

 mons to find, on inspection of the 

 Journals, that in a case of life and 

 death their predecessors had ujjon 

 only a few minutes examination 

 adopted a measure of so much im- 

 portance. 



Sir Arthur Piggott, on the same 

 side, observed, that if ever a legis- 

 lature took a wrong step, it was 

 when there existed a degree of in- 

 dignation again-t persons who had 

 committed violent aggressions, 

 against private property and the 

 public peace. Before any one ask- 

 ed him to extend the punishment 

 and make it capital, he ought to 

 prove that the law had been en- 

 forced and found ineffectual ; but 

 as it did not appear that there had 

 been any prosecution upon the 28th 

 ofthe King, there was no autho- 

 rity for saving that the law was 

 not adequate to its purpose, ex- 

 cept that there was a necessity of 

 extending it to the breaking of 

 lace-frames. 



On the other side, the peculiar 

 danger and extent of the outrages 

 which had been committed, was 

 dwelt upon as a call upon the le- 

 gislature to enact some more se- 

 vere punishment than had hitherto 

 been applied to the case. The 

 house at length divided on the se- 

 cond reading, which was carried 

 by 94 against 17. Mr. Ryder then 

 moving that the bill be committed 

 for to-morrow. Sir S. Romilly 

 moved as an amendment to substi- 

 tute 



