RETURN OF COMMITMENTS, &c.

Times, May 5.

Sir Samuel Romilly, pursuant to the notice which he had given, rose to move for a return of the number of persons who had been committed within a certain period to prison, within England and Wales. His wish was to procure all the information that could be obtained upon this subject in a more distinct, and consequently useful shape, than could be derived from the returns upon the table of the house. In consequence of a motion which he had made last session upon this subject, he had reason to think that returns had been made to the office of the secretary of state, containing much information, but not all that it was desirable should be in the possession of the public. In the return on the table from the secretary of state's office, they had only a return of the number of commitments, of those who were acquitted, or discharged on bills not found, or discharged by proclamation. But the return did not contain that part of the information which would be most particularly desirable; a return of the offences for which the several prisoners were committed, or convicted, and of which they had been acquitted, and then discharged. It would be important for the house to be in possession of such information, in order to know how many were committed for murder, forgery, and other crimes, with respect to which no alteration of the law was in contemplation; and also how many for larcenies, &c. and the circumstances of aggravation. It would be observed, from the return on the table, that by much the largest class consisted of those committed for larcenies, being altogether 2423 names. With respect to these, he thought it would be necessary to know how many had been committed for privately stealing from the person, in houses, or in shops, as well as what number were tried, what number acquitted, and what number discharged. Information of this description would be most satisfactory, before any alteration should be made in the law, because every such alteration being an experiment, it must be desirable to ascertain,

as nearly as possible, the grounds upon which the experiment rests. The information he alluded to would afford the best answer to arguments founded on presumptions which had been used on a late occasion. The motion he proposed to make was, "That an humble address be presented to his majesty, that he "would be graciously pleased to direct that there be laid before "the house a return of the number of persons, male and female, "who have been committed for trial at the different assizes, or 66 great sessions, from the year 1805 to the year 1809, inclusive; "distinguishing the charges upon which each was committed, "the crimes for which indicted, convicted, or acquitted, and also

distinguishing under the head of each crime the number of "those committed, convicted, acquitted, discharged upon no bills "being found, and discharged by proclamation; together with, “under each head of offence, the number of those who were exe"cuted."

They had the and he had no

It was unnecessary for him to state the advantage that would be derived from such a return. He was aware of the difficulty of procuring a return such as he called for, and that, when he made a similar motion last year, the secretary of state informed him that no such return existed in his office. He was indebted to the politeness and attention of the secretary of state, for his having undertaken to call upon the clerks of assize for all the information upon the subject that they could supply; and some had been thus obtained, though not all that was necessary. return of the commitments and the indictments, doubt that a return might be obtained from the clerks of assize, who were six in number in England, and four in Wales, of the convictions and of the offences, whether laid in the indictment or otherwise. But his object was not alone to obtain this information because it was valuable, but with a view to a measure, the fate of which on a former night he deplored. If he thought the sense of the house was decidedly against that measure, he should not bring it forward again. But when he considered that it had been lost only by a majority of two, and that of those who voted

against it, two at least seemed to be doubtful as to the bill, and voted against it only as connected with some other measures of which they did not approve; he should have no hesitation to submit it to the decision of the same house, that had disposed of it on its own merits; because, where there was doubt, the leaning should be to life. For his own part, so far as related to that bill, he felt himself in the situation of a criminal, not convicted of the crime with which he stood charged, but for some other act done or intended. If the forms of the house would allow it, he should bring forward the same bill this session; at all events, it was his intention to do so early in the next session. On a question of that description, totally unconnected with party, he had to lament, that any gentleman should have thought it necessary to canvas for votes against it; and yet it was obvious, that all the gentlemen in office then in the house had voted against it.* Of this he did not

Subjoined is a list of the voters. It is inserted because it may elucidate this sentence in the speech of Sir S. Romilly, and without the slightest wish to insinuate that the friends and opponents of this bill were not influenced by motives of equal purity.

Times, May 4, 1810.

Right hon. C. Arbuthnot, secretary of the treasury;-Sir R. Bickerton, bart. lord of the admiralty ;-James Buller, ditto;-hon. C. A. Cooper, clerk of the ordnance;-J. W. Croker, secretary to the admiralty ;-hon. W. Elliott, lord of the treasury;-James Farquhar;-right hon. J. Foster, chancellor of the Irish exchequer ;-W. Frankland ;-W. Fitzhugh;-Sir V. Gibbs, attorney-general;-D. Giddy;-Henry Goulburn, under secretary of state;-H. Herbert ; -George Johnstone;-Hugh Leycester ;-J. H. Loft ;-right hon. C. Long, joint paymaster of the forces ;-S. R. Lushington, chairman of the committee of ways and means ;— - Sir Macdonald;-G. A. Macnaughton ;-Viscount Palmerstone, lord of the admiralty ;-right hon. S. Perceval, first lord of the treasury, chancellor of the exchequer, chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, &c. &c. &c.—Sir W. Plomer, solicitor-general;—hon. W. W. Pole, chief secretary in Ireland;-right hon. R. Ryder, secretary of state;-C. M. Sutton, judge-advocate ;—Sir T. Thompson, comptroller of the navy;-Lord John Thynne, vice-chamberlain to his majesty ;—right hon. T. Wallis, member of the board of controul;-R. Ward, lord of the admiralty ;-W. Wemyss ;-R. Whar. ton, secretary to the treasury;-right hon. W. Windham.

The

ין

complain, though he must complain of the thin attendance in the house on that occasion. It was impossible that gentlemen could be indifferent on a question which was to decide whether the lives of eight hundred fellow creatures should be left liable to be sacrificed. He had heard that many gentlemen friendly to the measure would have attended if they had known that the bill was to come on. He had given notice of the day on which it was to be brought on, in rather a full attendance, and he did think it rather strange that the Highgate archway, or the Holloway water bills, should obtain a fuller attendance than this important measure. He took that opportunity of giving notice, that if the business fixed for Monday should go off, he should bring on the third reading of the remaining bill, and if not, at all events on this day se'nnight. He also gave notice that he should bring in the former bill early in the next session of parliament. He could not conceive, as had been stated, that the keeping of this subject open could have any influence upon those connected with the administration of justice. He should therefore move, &c.-On the motion being put,

Mr. Secretary Ryder did not mean to object to the motion of his honourable and learned friend, however he might differ as to the measure. He agreed that the information was important to be obtained, and he rose only to guard against any misconstruction of his views, if, after all the pains he could exert, he should fail in obtaining the desired information. If he was not mistaken,

The minority who voted in favour of it were:

Hon. J. Abercromby, Scrope Bernard, Thomas Babington, Henry Brougham right hon. George Canning, Thomas Creevey, H. C. Combe, Vis. Folkestone, right hon. Sir W. Grant, Pascoe Grenfell, hon. C. H. Hutchinson, hon. W. Lambe, J. Leach, Sir W. Lemon, John Lemon, Macdonald, J. Marryat,

Morris, Charles

hon. W. R. Maule, Sir R. Milbanke, bart. Peter Moore,
O'Hara, Henry Parnell, Sir A. Pigott, Sir S. Romilly, R. Sharpe, W. Smith,
J. Stephen, W. Taylor, M. A. Taylor, H. Thornton, John Wharton, and W.
Wilberforce.

this was the same with the motion made by the learned gentleman last session, to which there was a return on the table. The fact was, that the information obtained had not been, and could not be procured by compulsion from the officers, but by an application to them, which they might comply with or not, as they pleased. Many had, no doubt, complied. For himself, he should only say, that he would do all in his power, but he would give no pledge that all the information desired would be obtained. He should not then enter into the question which had been disposed of the other night.

Sir T. Turton, in vindication of the house, stated, that the bill had been brought in on a day when the county sessions were held throughout England; a circumstance which was sufficient to account for the thin attendance on that day.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in answer to the observation of his honourable and learned friend, that votes had been canvassed for against the bill, observed, that if it had been treated as a party question, a much fuller attendance must have been obtained on either side of the house.

Sir Samuel Romilly stated, that the return on the table was one which had been many years before the house, and had not been obtained, in consequence of his motion last session, from the clerks of assize. He had no doubt that much valuable information upon this subject would be found in the secretary of state's offices.

The motion was then put and agreed to, and also a motion for a like return of commitments for trial at the quarter sessions, with similar distinctions.

The addresses were ordered to be presented to his majesty by such members as were of the privy council.