of the forgery of wills. It also provided that any person against whom
a conviction of forgery should pass should lie in prison, either with or
without hard labour, at home for the space of fourteen years, or if
sent abroad to a penal colony, should be transported for any term not
exceeding that number of years. He further proposed to give, not only
the power of inflicting either of these punishments, but also that of
accumulating both whenever the circumstances of the case should be so
atrocious as to deserve the greatest severity. He proposed, likewise, to
vest a power in the crown, authorising it to treat all persons convicted
of forgery in such a manner as would mark forgery as an offence of a
blacker dye than any other which was not directed against life. Finally,
to meet the objection that the importance of employing persons of
education in the public service in new and remote colonies would lead,
first to the pardon, and then to the employment in public situations of
such persons convicted of forgery, he proposed to take away all power
of remitting or relaxing the punishment of forgery, except by a
representation to the king of the grounds on which it was proposed to
remit it, and by a remission of it by the king at home. This clause was
carried, and Mr. Peel thereupon relinquished all charge of the bill,
hinting at the same time that the house would probably regret the
decision to which it had come. On its introduction in the lords,
therefore, the lord chancellor declared himself against so sweeping
a repeal of the capital punishment, and moved that the bill should be
restored to the state in which it had originally been introduced into
the house of commons. His views were supported by Lords Tenterden,
Wynford, and Eldon. The amendment of the lord chancellor was carried by
a large majority; and although when the bill was returned to the commons
those who supported Sir James Mackintosh's amendment complained that the
lords had improperly treated them, the lord chancellor's amendment was
finally agreed to, and the bill passed.
BILL FOR AMENDING THE LAW OF LIBEL.
In a previous article certain state prosecutions for libel have been
noticed. These prosecutions, and the conduct of the attorney-general in
promoting them, were brought before the house of commons by Sir Charles
Wetherell, on a motion for copies of the proceedings on the three _ex
officio_ informations against the proprietor of a London newspape
|