Lastly, the case of imprisonment on an accusation of treason is without all remedy. This defect I propose to supply. Sir, libel, calling him to a diet near the end of the ters for that offence, and was served with a forty days. That libel was deserted, and he was of new committed, on a charge of wearing the Highland dress. And finally, he was brought to trial on the original charge of murder, of which he was acquitted. This appears from Minutes of Debate, 10th June, 1754. The evidence on the trial is curious in one particular: for one of the chief witnesses against the panel details the discovery of the by means of intelligence received from the dead body and of the manner of the murder, ghost of the deceased."-3 Hume, 178 note. the accusation, are doubtful of their case as it stands. These are usually the sheriffs and county magistrates, from whom the lord Advocate receives his information; and it happens very often indeed, that, when the case is to come on at the assizes, or circuit, the Advocate Depute finds his information incomplete, and puts off the trial, on the representation of these magistrates, that further evidence may be procured. This is not only a grievous wrong to the prisoners, but a great hardship on that part of the public who must maintain prisoners till they are tried; and would be insufferable from its effect in crowding the gaols, if persons taken up in Scotland, accused of crimes, were more in number than they happily are. This I propose to remedy, by the introduction of a proceeding in the nature of a gaol delivery. In the second place, there is no provision for forcing on the trial at the assizes or circuit court; but the prisoner, if he runs his letters, incurs the risk, and frequently the certainty, of bringing it on at Edinburgh, at a distance from his witnesses, and either at an expense which he cannot afford, or with a degree of danger which he dare not encounter. I have known many instances of these considerations deterring these unhappy persons from taking advantage of the act 1701, and subjecting them to a lengthened imprisonment in consequence of it. I propose to obviate this, by putting it in the power of the prisoner to set forth, in his letters of intimation, that he desires only to limit the delay of his trial to the next circuit for the district where the crime is said to have been committed. In the third place, there are no means, by the act, of getting finally rid of an accusation, though letters of intimation have been run, and the necessary length of imprisonment-a hundred days-endured; for the new criminal letters may be delayed as long as the prosecutor chooses. I propose to limit this to two years.* The efficacy of the remedy afforded by the Act 1701, is well illustrated by a case mentioned by Mr. Hume, in 1754, and by the later case of Mackinlay, either of which cases may, under the existing law, be that of any man in Scotland. “Duncan Clark had been imprisoned on a charge of murder, had run his letters, and been discharged at the end of the sixty days. Soon after, he was committed for theft, ran his let Andrew Mackinlay was apprehended on the 22nd of Feb. 1817, on a charge of high treason, and also for administering unlawful oaths, contrary to 52 Geo. III. 104. He was brought before the sheriff of Lanarkshire for examination, and committed to Glasgow gaol for trial. On the 17th of March, a petition was presented to the lords of Justiciary by the lord advocate, which set forth, that he charged Mackinlay, and one William Edgar. with high treason, and prayed for a warrant to incarcerate them in the castle of Edinburgh, for the said offences, till liberated in due course of law. Warrant was granted the same day, accordingly, as of course. Mackinlay was advised by his counsel, that he could not 1701, cap. 6; and that the statute of the 7th apply to force on his trial under the statute of Anne, cap. 21, had introduced the law of England in regard to the trial of treason. Soon afterwards, he was served with an indictment, charging him, not with treason, but felony, for administering unlawful oaths; and a similar indictment was executed against William Edgar, the 9th of April, when a debate took place on William Edgar was brought up for trial on court expressed very serious doubts, and orthe relevancy of the indictment, on which the dered informations (printed arguments). The diet (i. e. day of trial) against Mackinlay was adjourned to the 10th of April, and against Edgar to the 19th of May. Meanwhile, the lord advocate abandoned both indictments, and in April new indictments were served. on the 19th of May, Edgar was placed at the bar under the new indictment; but, as the diet on the former was not deserted by interlocutor of the court, Edgar was advised not to plead to the second indictment. A search was appointed for precedents, and the diet adjourned to the 26th of May. It was then found that the second indictment was well served, but the prisoner not bound to plead till the first indictment should be deserted by interlocutor of the court. This being done, Edgar pleaded not guilty, and all diets were continued till the 2nd of June. On the 2nd of June, Mackinlay was brought up on the second in I think I have said enough to shew that the law of Scotland, in this most import ant matter, requires parliamentary revision; and, indeed, that such are its uncertainty and insufficiency, that it would be practically intolerable if these were not counteracted by the state of manners in that country, and the lenity with which criminal justice is there for the most part administered. But it were a great mistake to believe, that much personal suffering and actual evil are not produced in Scotland from this state of the law. In saying this, I do not mean to impute blame to those who are intrusted with the administration of it. If I thought so I should proceed in a different manner. They arise from the defects of the law itself. It may be true that they do not usually fall on persons of the most prudent conduct, or perhaps of the most unblemished character. But this is no apology for the law. It is the proper business of the law to provide that those who are guilty of crimes shall be brought to trial, and to punishment, with no more of suffering than is strictly necessary to these purposes; and, whatever is inflicted on the guilty beyond this, partakes as truly of injustice and wrong, as if it were inflicted on the innocent. It is attended with as much injury to the public, as to individ dictment; and the first indictment being deserted by interlocutor, he pleaded not guilty, and objected to the relevancy. The court, intimating an opinion against the relevancy, but desiring to have informations, the lord-advocate moved to desert the diet on the second indictment, pro loco et tempore reserving to him to raise a new indictment for the same offence Interlocutor, as of course, was pronounced accordingly. The lord advocate instantly presented a petition, reiterating the original charge of treason, and craving warrant to commit to the castle of Edinburgh, as before; which was granted, as of course. On the 7th of June, a third indictment was executed against him, for administering unlawful oaths; and being brought to the bar on the 23rd of June, he pleaded not guilty, and objected to the relevancy of the third indictment; on which informations were ordered, and the diet continued till the 14th of July. Informations were put in accordingly, and judgment was pronounced by the court on the 18th of July, sustaining the indictment by a majority-Lord Gillies dissenting. He was tried on the 19th, when, after one witness had been cast and four examined, the lord-advocate threw up the case, and the prisoner was acquitted, having been in prison five months.-Trial of Andrew Mac kinlay, printed at Edinburgh.-1818. uals. It enlists the feelings of mankind against the law-it degrades its character, and impedes its course ;-and, it is worthy of consideration, that those, on whom these things usually fall, are precisely in that class of life where they suffer the most from them. They and their families are usually dependent on their labour, and, in a greater or less degree, if they are not abandoned, on their character also. To all of them, and to those who depend on them, a lengthened imprisonment is ruin. To those who have a character to lose, the being committed to gaol charged with a crime, is little less, though the accusation turn out to be groundless. Sir, I am aware that I have discharged the duty I have undertaken, very imperfectly. It was my wish to trespass on your time at no greater length than was necessary; and, if any observations shall be made, which require that I should add any thing to what I have said, I shall trust to the indulgence of the House to permit me to do so. It is right, that I should say further, that it is not my wish to hurry this measure through the House. If I shall obtain leave to bring in the bill, my intention is, with the permission of the House, to move the second reading for an early day, in order to its being committed, and being printed, with the blanks filled up. After which, I wish to allow sufficient time for its being considered, as well in Scotland, by the judges there, as by gentlemen here- and I shall be ready, for my part, if any such desire is expressed, to permit it to stand over for whatever time may be thought necessary to its due consideration. Sir, I beg to move you, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to alter and amend an Act passed in the Parliament of Scotland, in the 8th and 9th Sessions of the 1st Parliament of King William 3rd, intituled, An Act for preventing Wrongous Imprisonment and against undue Delays in Trials."" The Lord Advocate said, he did not mean to oppose the bringing in the bill, but at the same time he thought that great caution should be observed in interfering with a law which had existed for upwards of one hundred years, and which might be considered the habeas corpus act of Scotland. The learned lord then proceeded to call the attention of the House to the advantages of the present law, and contended, that the act of 1701 afforded a greater protection to the people of Scotland against wrongous imprisonment, than was afforded to the people of England by the habeas corpus act. He hoped, however, that his hon. and learned friend would bring in his bill rather for the amendment than the repeal of the present law, as the word "repeal" might excite some alarm among the people of Scotland. The changes which the bill of his hon. and learned friend would introduce into the law of Scotland would cause all the criminals of that country to be tried in Edinburgh, and would so create an annual expense of 15,000l. or 20,000l., without conferring any benefit on the public. which, though it might not be perfect, was passed in very good times, and for a very good and useful purpose. Mr. J. P. Grant, in reply, said, that he would comply with the suggestions which had been made to him, and would alter the title of his bill from "a bill to repeal," to "a bill to alter and amend," the act of 1701. Leave was then given to bring in the bill. CATTLE ILL-TREATMENT BILL.] Mr. Martin, of Galway, rose to move for leave to bring in a bill to extend the provisions of the act 3 Geo. 4th., cap 71, to prevent the cruel and improper treatment of cattle. His bill was, he said, an exact copy of a bill which had been drawn up by the Attorney-general, and which had formerly undergone discussion in another place. The object of it was, to render the cutting and maiming of animals maliciously, punishable as a misdemeanor. Formerly, that offence was punishable under the Black act as a capital felony; but the repeal of that act had brought the whole law again into force, which punish Mr. Abercromby rejoiced that his hon. and learned friend had introduced this important subject to the consideration of parliament. At the same time he was quite aware that it was one which required great deliberation, and he was persuaded that his hon. and learned friend was prepared to concede as much delay in the progress of the measure, as could be justly demanded for that purpose. He also concurred with the learned lord, that it would be better that the avowed objected the cutting and maiming of cattle with of the bill should be to alter and amend rather than to repeal the existing law; for although he thought the act of 1701 very susceptible of improvement, and that it ought to be improved, yet it was an act which had been extremely useful, and which was associated, in the minds of the people of Scotland, with the liberty of the subject. It was agreed on all hands, that the subject was a weighty and important one; and it was desirable that what was done should be done effectually and permanently. The public at large were, therefore, greatly indebted to his hon. and learned friend for the opportu nity thus afforded by him of accomplishing so desirable an object. The Solicitor-General expressed a hope, that no alteration would be made in the law without consulting those who were best acquainted with it. He was ready to admit, upon his own knowledge, that the law was chargeable with many uncertainties and discrepancies which called for improvement. Mr. Denman complimented the learned lord on the conciliatory tone in which he had met the motion of his hon. and learned friend, and stated that he should be very happy to give his humble support towards amending any defects which should be proved to exist in the act of 1701; an act VOL. XIII. transportation, provided it could be proved that the party guilty of such cutting and maiming was actuated by malice against their owner. Now, he wished to give to animals the right of protecting themselves; or rather to give to any person who chose to act as their prochain ami, the right of covering them with the protection of the law. With that view he submitted to the House the draught of a bill which had formerly been drawn up by the hon. and learned gentleman, who now filled the high situation of his majesty's Attorney-general. Mr. Secretary Peel said, he would not oppose the introduction of the bill, on the contrary, he was rather desirous to see it, as it purported to come from his hon. and learned friend, the Attorney-general. He wished the hon. member for Galway would introduce into one bill all the ob jects of his compassion; because, if he did not, the Statute-book would soon be increased to a very inconvenient bulk. He likewise wished that the hon. member would define more clearly what he meant by the word "malice." Was it malice against the animal, or malice against the master, which he wished to punish? Mr. Martin.-Both, but particularly malice against the animal; who ought to have his remedy at law in such cases. 2 E tenant of the West Riding of Yorkshire, a compliment on the readiness with which he had interfered the instant the matter was known to him. He was afraid there were many cases of such oppression exer cised under the name of law and justice, in some of the smaller places of confinement in the country. They were a disgrace to the country and the age. The facts of the case which he had to lay before the House were these:-an indi Mr. Peel. Was it, then, to be considered as malice against the animal, if any person cropped a dog's ears? If the dog was to be the judge, he would certainly deem it malice against himself that led any person to mutilate his body. If he understood any thing of the hon. gentleman's bill, it would certainly tend to put down several practices which at present were very prevalent in our mode of treat ing brute animals, and would go further than the House would be likely to sanc-vidual who was arrested for a trifling debt, tion. He would, however, reserve what he had to say for the future stages of the bill. Mr. F. Palmer read the preamble of the act which this bill was introduced to extend, and contended, that from the very large terms of it, any extension of its powers must be quite unnecessary. He had intended to have opposed the introduction of the measure; but he would forego his intention, in consequence of what had fallen from the right hon. Secretary for the Home Department. had soon afterwards escaped from confinement. Before he had been long at large he was retaken, and lodged in Bradford gaol. Here, under the directions of the bailiff, for it appears the keeper was a very old man, and quite incapable of attending to the duties of his office, the prisoner was loaded with irons, and never for one instant were the handcuffs re moved from his hands for seven days. Owing to the humanity of his fellowprisoners he then obtained some respite; but he was afterwards kept in irons seven weeks, and these irons were never removed, except for a few minutes once a week, to change his shirt. He admitted that part of the hardships the prisoners suffered were owing to the nature of the gaol, and were not to be imputed to the gaoler. One of the miscreants who had inflicted these cruelties was afterwards tried, convicted, and punished. He had an opportunity of seeing most of the county gaols, and he knew a much better system existed in them. This sort of petty tyranny did not exist in them, and he hoped, something would be done to regulate these minor gaols. He had heard of other oppressions, but he made it a rule not to bring any thing forward of that description, without the most convincing evidence. He might, however, mention, that a great degree of oppression was exercised on men who were shut up in these filthy places for four, five, or six weeks, when they were indebted some paltry sums; such inflictions, though of great consequence, escaped public notice, and the poor wretches were left without protection or means of redress. The hon. member concluded by moving, "That an humble address be presented to his majesty, praying that his majesty would be pleased to lay before the House copies ABUSES AND MISMANAGEMENT OF of all the correspondence which had pasBRADFORD GAOL.] Mr. John Smith, sed between the Secretary of State for in rising to bring forward a motion rela- the Home Department and the Lordtive to Bradford Gaol, paid the lord lieu-lieutenant of the West Riding of York Mr. Martin replied, that he had made nothing an offence in his bill, which had not been previously declared such under the Black act-an act under which several men had been hung, and repeatedly executed. It might be a very good jokethough, for his life, he could not see the wit of it-to ask him whether he meant to make the cropping of a dog's ears a misdemeanor. He had, however, a very triumphant answer to give it. It was not declared a hanging matter under the Black act to crop a dog's ears; and, it would not, therefore, under this act be declared a misdemeanor. His bill would not prevent any gentleman from bestowing on his dog that punishment which was necessary to remind it of the discipline it ought to follow in the field. He might whip it if he pleased from sunrise to sunset; but he must not cut it, or maim it wantonly, because such cutting and maiming could neither improve it as a setter or a beagle. In the committee, if this bill should ever get so far, he should propose several additional clauses; but at present he should content himself with introducing it as it had been prepared by his hon. friend the Attorney-general. Leave was given to bring in the bill. shire, relative to the abuses and misman- | other mills, such as those for manufacagement of Bradford Gaol." turing flax and woollens. Mr. Hobhouse said, he had found so much difficulty in making regulations for cotton mills, that he thought that single object was enough for a single person. If the House was disposed to make it a general measure, he should have no ob Mr. C. Wilson also wished to see the measure made general, and applicable to children employed in all such mills. Mr. Secretary Peel certainly did not mean to oppose the motion. If such abuses were committed, he would not take on himself the task of protecting the guilty parties. The papers would be found to reflect the highest credit on the lord lieutenant of the West Riding; for,jection. as soon as he had heard of the matter, he had made it his business to inquire into it, and transmitted the whole account to him at the Home Office. He had thought it his duty to refer the matter to the Attorney-general, and one of the parties had been prosecuted and punished. He was aware of many of the evils arising from these local jurisdictions, and had himself brought in a bill last session, to enable the magistrates of such jurisdictions to send these prisoners to the county gaols. He believed that, when the matter should be inquired into, it would be found that most of them had taken advantage of the provisions of this bill. In Essex this had long been the practice. He wished, however, to go further than this bill, and should not be sorry if there were no local jurisdictions whatever. He should be well pleased to see all crimes tried by the regular judges and all the local jurisdictions abolished. Mr. Abercromby complimented the right hon. gentleman for the sentiments he had just expressed, and hoped he would not stop short in his career. He entirely concurred with the right hon. gentleman as to local jurisdictions; and thought, if the right hon. gentleman referred to their origin and mode of administering justice, that he would not hesitate as to the course which he ought to pursue. At least, all crimes involving capital punishment, should be tried by the judges. The best mode of proceeding would be the appointment of a commission to visit the different places, and report concerning them. The motion was agreed to. CHILDREN IN COTTON MILLS.] Mr. Hobhouse said, he would not at that late hour trespass on the House with any observations; but, merely move for leave to bring in a bill, the object of which would be, to regulate the working hours for Children employed in Cotton Mills. Mr. J. Smith highly approved of the measure, but thought it would be better to make it more general, and extend it to Mr. Peel said, he had no objection to the hon. member's bringing in his bill : but he entreated the House to pause before it entered too extensively into this field of legislation. The present bill was like one to which he had before given his support; but the House must take care and not carry this sort of legislation too far. If they made the regulations too severe, the masters might refuse to employ any children. Mr. W. Smith was in favour of the bill. He thought the former measure was inoperative, because the visiting magis trates were not empowered to inspect the cotton mills. Leave was given to bring in the bill. HOUSE OF COMMONS. ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIEF BILL.] Mr. Brougham moved the order of the day that the House should resolve itself into a committee of the whole House on the Roman Catholic Relief bill. On the question, that the Speaker do now leave the chair. General Gascoyne rose and said, that his opinions as to the impolicy of this measure having remained unchanged, he was anxious to avail himself of the earliest opportunity of entering his protest against the bill now before the House. He had opposed this measure when it was introduced alone, and discussed solely on its own merits; but he was the more determined to oppose it when he found it accompanied by its adjuncts-the clergy provision bill and the elective disfranchisement bill-both of which he was bound to consider as component parts of the measure itself. Looking at it in all views, he could not help thinking, that if passed, the whole measure would be one of the most milk and water kind that ever proceeded from parliament. That part which related to the elective franchise in Ireland, |