TRANSACTIONS OF THE SECTIONS. 203 



among modern civilized States. He did not believe in the New Zealander looking 

 upon the ruins of St. Paul's ; but rather looked foi-ward to Windsor Castle becoming 

 a West-End mansion, and the villas of the metropolis flomishing on the hills of 

 the White Horse. No commimity ever decayed in which the poorer classes coiUd 

 earn a reasonable independence in free competition with all the worldi 



On Caijital Punishments and their Influence on Crime, 

 By HJENET AsmvoRTH. 



From time to time, under the ever- varying condition of our people, an adjustment 

 of punishment for offences has been determined in some way or other by human 

 judgment, and, for the most part, the pimishment inflicted has been gi-eatly in 

 excess of the magnitude of the offences committed. The extremity of this policy 

 would appear to have been reached in the time of Hemy VHI., during whose reign 

 it has been stated that the incredible number of 72,000 persons were executed for the 

 crime of theft alone, besides those who suffered death for treason and other grave 

 offences. So fearfid an amount of legalized slaughter, committed on a population so 

 small, was calculated to have had a most impressive effect. And yet what do we find ? 

 Sir Thomas More, writing at that period, says, " Although so many were trussed 

 up, a man coidd not travel from his own home without fear of being either murdered 

 or robbed." It has been represented that Queen Elizabeth expressed her sm-prise 

 that men would be committing crimes at the foot of the scaffold ; and by way of 

 corrective of this gross sinfulness of her people, she gave orders that upon discovery 

 of the offenders they should be hanged without benefit of clergy. 



Dming the reign of the Stuai-ts and some of the Brunswick family, the number 

 of capital offences was gradually increased to the extent of 220, and the pecimiary 

 amount for the stealing of which death was inflicted descended to as low a sum as 

 five shillings. Coming nearer to our own day, the prevailing sentiment in relation 

 to almost all offences contiaued to rest upon the theory of the Legislatiu'e, that it 

 was needful to hang men by way of example, in order to prevent others committing 

 crimes. In the year 1786, James Holland, of Earkham, was condemned at the 

 Lancaster Assizes as a " croft breaker," having stolen 30 yards of cotton cloth, of 

 the value of £3, from the bleach grounds of Mr. Thweat, of Birrnden, near Bolton. 

 He wag conveyed in a cart fi-om the Castle of Lancaster to the town of Bolton, 

 and was executed there on the 18th September, 1786. Such was the avowed pm-- 

 pose and determination that the most shovdd be made of the impressive effect, that 

 the employers of the neighbom-hood had their servants and work-people assembled 

 on the spot to witness the spectacle ; and upon the following Sunday the Rev. E. 

 WTiitehead, vicar of the parish chm-ch, improved the occasion by a sermon upon 

 the recent execution. Taking a retrospective review of the foregoing exposition 

 of one of the 220 cases in which the extreme penalty of the law might be inflicted, 

 the tarifl'of liability reduced to five shillings, and a theory of pimishments calculated 

 to inspire a terror of crime, how humiliating is the commentary of the reverend 

 \'icar, that " criminals daily increase, and rapine and villany are at their utmost 

 summit !" Indeed, it could no longer be doubted that there had been existing a 

 grievous misapprehension of what were the most judicious and enlightened means 

 to secure the end designed. Following a disclosure of the notoriously ill success of 

 extreme punishments, a committee was foiTned in London about the year 1808, to 

 afford assistance to Sir Samuel Eomilly, M.P., in obtaining the amelioration of our 

 criminal code; and their exertions were gradually successfid. One offence after 

 another ceased to be capital, and a change in om- penal code was more and more 

 urgently demanded. Public discussion of the subject brought about the acknow- 

 ledgment, with all the array of a new discovery, that it was not so much the 

 severity as the certainty of punishment which deters men from the commission of 

 offences. The difiicidty of procuring the repeal or even some mitigation of om' 

 antiquated penal statutes lay with the Legislature, and the character of the ob- 

 struction oflered will be estimated by reference to a few only of the accounts of the 

 proceedings. In the session of 18l0, Romilly succeeded in carrying^ through the 

 House of Commons the repeal of the law which made it a capital offence to steal 

 the value of 5s. in a shop. The House of Lords threw out the bill by a majority 

 of 31 to 11, and in this majority there were six bishops and one archbishop. From 

 a beginning so inauspicious to look upon, the progress of any salutary change could 



