Criminal
CO&Bill.
E27 8EPTEMBEB.ICriminal Oode Bill. 149
with all he said, a n d I shall vote against the motion made b y t h e hon. member for Brisbane South, and vote for the retention of the clause.
N r . K I D S T O N : Before we go t o a divisinn I would like t o say t h i s : Both from the statement as given from t h e Chair and from the state- ment made by the previous Spcaker in 169.5, quoted b y himself here this afternoon, it is evident, I think, t h a t both t h e previous Speaker, Mr. Cowley, in 1895, and you ynorself, Sir, at t h e present time, consider t h a t t h e method of introducing these things has been a bad one.
Mr. DAWSON : It was not indicated nr even circulated. We never Raw it.
Mr. K I D S T O N : I would very much have preferred if t h e House would have permitted t h e Treasurer to have withdrawn the Hill, and have had the matter brought i n in a way more regular, more in accordance with t h e precedents of t h e House. I think t h a t if the House rejects this clause a very great wrong will be done.
Mr. DAWSON: W h a t about t h e Standing Orders ?
Mr. K I D S T O N : I am n o t troubled about t h e interpretation of the Standing Orders. T h e ques- tion is whether this clause is important t o the Bill-what value this reduction of 2 per cent. is to be to the lncal bodies. It might in some case3 make all the difference between them carrying out a work of thiR fiort or leaving it a!one. A s 1 see by t h e tone of the discussion t h a t i t is quite evident that if the niotion of t h e hon. member for Brisbane South is carried this Bill will be passed without the Gth clause, t thiuk i t is ad- visable to vote again& the motion, although I ani convinced, from what I have heard, t h a t t h e amendinent was intrnduced in a n irregular f o r i . I think tho Bill should not be put in a loss effective form, because it might have been in a better form. It is a pity it should be mutilated by striking out clause 6.
Question-That clause 6 be omitted-put : a n d t h e House divided :-
Messrs. Dicksnn, (:hutawuy, Philp, Rutledge, Lesina, Dalrymple, \I aedonald-Pstemon. n'. Ilaniilton, Poxton,
&flaxwell, Kerr, Fogarty, Urowne, Turley, Druke. Groom, Hood, T. B. Cribb, Stephcnsou, JIcDonnell, McDonald, Dawson, and Armstrong.
AYES, 23.
NOES, 35.
Jlessrs. Glussey, Fisher, IIanran, Kidston, Dunsford, Newell, Murrxy, Cowley, J. Hnniilt,on, Pinney, Forsyth, Givens, Jlackinto&. Jenkinson, Curtis, Forrest, Leahy, O'Connell, W. Thorn, Kates, Anriear, Bridges, Story, Tooth, Lord, Cnmpboll, Stodart. Fitz:.eruld, Harducre, Ryland, J. C. Cribb. Keogh, Stewurt, Dibley, and Jackson
.
P A I R . Aye-Mr. Smith. No-Mr. Bell.
Resolved in t h e negative.
On the motion of the T R E A S U R E R , the third reacling was made a n Order of t h e Day for to-morrow.
C R I M I K A L C O D E B I L L .
* Mr. L E S I N A (Clermont) : A s a layman I feel a certain amount I J f diffidence [5'30 p.m.1 in getting u p t o criticise a measure of this character. It would appear t h a t the necessary qualificntion for dealing with a measure of this kind is the poswrsion of a legal mind. I think we are all agreed upon the necepsity for the codification of our laws.
Attempts have been made i n various parts of t h e world to codify the criminal law, a n d they have been more or ltss successful. Attempts have been made in t h e old country, but so far they have not been the success which the friends of codificatinn would like to see rzsult from their efforts. There are various dige3ts made in England of the criminal law, and very excellent works of reference on the subject, b u t so far the English Parliament has not seen its way clear t o
SECOND REAUIPI'G-RESUMPTION OB
DEBATE.
adopt any of these codifications. There is always a danger in codifying t h e laws of a country-especially the criminal laws-of errore creepingin through the framing of those laws i n iin entirely new language. I n a n Assembly like this, composed as it is chiefly of laymen, when passing such a Code as is now submitted to UP,
errors might easily be overlooked. which in the course of time would d o a considerable amount of harm. We have t o a large extent t o depend upnn the sperch of the Attorney-General, a n d we have also to depend u p m the report of the Cum- mission, which was composed of eminent leqal gentlemen likeSirSamu~lGriffithand men of t h a t type. There are one or two p i n t s which I say at t h e nutset we mag fake for granted. They are based upon the speech of t h e Attorney-General and the report of the Commissinn, and with them I think the majority of lion. member6 willagree.
F o r instance, there is Lhe question of the expedi- ency of such a Code. T h a t is agreed upon. B u t i t would be much better had the codification of the criminal law of Australia been l t f t entirely to t h e Federal Parliament. When it was pro- posed here the other day t h a t this Parliament of Queensland should pay old age pensions to aged workers, t h e Premier pointed out t h a t the matter should, and might very well, be left to the Federal Parliament, which could deal with a cornprehenaive measure in a statesmanlike fashion. I n the matter of the codification of the criminal law, there is even greater n p c m i t y for its heing left t o the Federal Parliament.
Mr. LEAHY : B u t the Federal Parliament has no power t o deal with this.
Mr. L E S I N A : B u t i t may. It is quite possible to give it power to deal with the codifi- cation of the criminal laws for t h e whole of Australia.
The H o l m SECRETARY : Is it likely?
Mr. L E S I N A : I n our Queensland laws we have some half-dozen offences in which the death penalty is inflicted, while in New South Wales thev have the moat bloodthirsty code i n Aus- tralia a t the present time. I n tlie time t o come the necessity will undoubtediy arise for dealing with these I ~ W R on a comprehensive and national basis, and not leave i t to each colony t o d o the work for itself. Hcwever, the expediency of having a Cude of criminal law is admitted, even if this colony undertakes the work for itself. So far, it is the only colony which has attempted -and attempted, I believe, with success-to codify its criminal laws. One argument which was used the other night by t h e Attorney- General which appraled to me was this: He drew attention t o the fact t h a t there were upwards of 1,000 offences t o be dealt with, which were scattered over the pages of about 250 statutes, which, to Sir Samuel Griffith, exposed glaring inconsistencies and incongruities. He mentioned m e specific offence-forgery-which was dcalt with in no less thansixty-four statutes, sixteen of which were Imperial ; and pointcd out that the fadt t h a t i t was necessary to take out of these various statutes the law dealing with this one crime ahowed the necessity for codification.
I said in cornnienciiig that a la!: ti a n might have a certain amount of diffidence in dealing with a matter of this kind, but I do not know t h a t a legal mind is specially qualified for dealing with the task. It hay been pointed out by one able writer in speaking of lawyers-and it is lawyers and judges who composed this Commission, and i t is lawyers who have the best knowledge of things-that the truth is t h a t lawyers are rarely philosophcrj. H e says-
The truth is, lawpers nre rarely philosophers ; the history oe the heart, rea! only in statuted.andlawcases, presents the worst side of hnman nature ; they are apt to consider men us wild beusts.
160 Cviminal
CodeB&?. [ASSEMBLY.] a i m i n a l
CodsBill.
A n d t h a t to a large extent accounts for the rather cold-blooded fsehion in which lawyers deal with matters of this kind. Possibly the lay mind can shed light on the subject in a manner which a legal mind is not in a position t o do. A s to the completeness of the Codo, the Commission which have furnished us with their report on t he Code point out t h a t it is very complete. I n judging of the completeness of t h e Code we have t o be guided by t h e Commission. and they say t h a t their work ia well done. Well, if you asked a builder who has just completed a building by contract to report U on t h a t bnild- ing, h e would, naturally enon$, give yob a n excellent report. T h e Commission tell 11s t h a t this work has been well done, but i t is fnr this House, after discussion, and after investigation of the Code, both OJI the second rending and when we e t into committee, t o find out whether t h e w o r t has been well done2
T h e ATTORNEY GENERAL: The cases are hardly parallel. T h e builder's work in this case is scrutinised, supervised, and revised by experts.
Mr. L E S I N A : I t a y we have largely to be guided by the report of t h e Commission-who say t h a t the work has been well done-and by the speech of t h e hon. antlenian ; but there is internal evidence in &e Ccde itself which influ- ences me in the belief t.hat the Code can he improved in one or two reppects which I udl point out. T h e additional princiltles in t h e Code are the changrs propostd in sections 57 and 59, section 319, section 696, and section 400, dealing respectively wirh obstruction t o the leginlatnre, aiding suicides, formal errnrs, and stealing b y agents. There are also certain airiendments pro- posed in the Cede which are very imrortant. For instance, there is theabolition of the death penalty in the case of rapo and in the case of robbery under arms with wounding. Those are two far- reaching reforms with which I am in hearty accord. Then we have suspenPion of punishment b y the application of the F i r s t Offenders Act to alloffencea, and a nwdificstion of the lawdealing with public attacks on religions creeds. These amendments made in the Draft Code by t h e Commission are, to my mind, very important, and will be fsr-reack.ing in their cffects; and I want, if pos~ible, in the course of m y argument, to carry hon. members with me so that they may see t h e necewity of pushing these reforms even further Rtill, and entirely abolishing pnniehment by mutilation, floggings, and the death penalty.
M y address to-night will be devoted generally t o a n amplification of the argument in favour of t h e abolition of punishment by niutilation and those other puninhnieuts which are still retained in t h e Draft Code. I notice with a great deal of plensure t h a t a large number of obsolete laws are abolished by this Code, and also many others under which any judge, who strictly adhered to the laws as thev exist i n Queensland, might inflict on citizens found guilty of certain cririies the most atrocious and barbarous penalties. I n the digrbt of the criminal law recently prepared by the Chief Justice, Sir S. W. Griffith, iefereuce is made to t h e puniehment t o De inflicted upon anyone found guilty of high treamm, according to 30 George III., chapter 48, and 54 Getrge III., chapter 146. Those laws exist in Queensland to-day, though I am pleased to find thaL they are t o be ab&olutely aboli~hed. Under those laws a person found guilt,y of high treason is treated thus-
((I) If he is a man, that he he drawn on a hurdle to the plnce of execution, and there banged by the ncck until he is dead, and that afterwards his head he severed from his body and .the hody divided into four quarters and disposed of a8 the Government may think Bt.
(a) If shels a wonan, that she should he drawn to the place of execution, and there hanged by the ueok until she is dead.
In the case of a man, IIer Majesty m y by warrant under aign-tnanual counteraignod by a principal Secre- tnry of State. direct that the offender need not be drawn on &hurdle, and that he he not, hanged by the neck, hut that his head he severed from his hody while he is alive, and may, by warrmt, direct how his head, body, and quarters shell be disposed of.
That is a nice piece of legislation to have in fnrce in a colony in such a high rrtate of civilisation as Queanslmd, and s h o w in what a high regard we should hold those legislators who have sat on the other aide of this Chamber for so many years, and permitted this barbarous law t o go unabolished. It is satisfactory t o tind that this vestige of n bygone day is no longer to appear on our statute-book. Then there is another pretty item in the " Digest " prepared b Sir Samuel GrifEth, which should inteneify t i e feeling of regard which n e feel at present for t he legislators sitting on the opposite benches. It is as follows :-
A n y pcrsons who. being assembled together t o the number of more than ten, repair to the Government or either House of Parlinmsnt, upon pretence of preaent- ing n petition, complaint or remonstrance, declaration or addrew are guilty of a mi.demesnour, aUd each of them is liable on conviction t o n flrie not exceeding 6300, and to imprisonment for the term of three months.
This atrocious Act was not passed away back in the dark agrs. It wzs passed in t h e tenth year of t h e reign of Queen Victoria, right in the middle of t h e present century. And some two or three yexrs ago, when a number of citizens came here t o present a pet,ition, they would hardly have ventured upon doing 80 if they had known t h a t such a law WSH in existence. T h a t a l p n is to be aholiahed, a8 also is the notorious 6th of George IV., chapter 129, the Act covering conspiracy, under which the union prisoners were sent to St. Helena. But there is some doubt in m y mind, for on looking u p the clauserelatingto conspiracy, I find that i t is possible that a judge or a public prosecutor may enter a Imeecution for intimidation. If a.st.rike were on, and I went to a man who had returned t o work in a place where t h e strike was in existence, and I argued with him t h a t he rhvuld not go to work, the law would nnt be applied ; but if two or three of u8 interviewed that. man and tried t o induce him not to go to work, i t ia very likely t h a t it would.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : No ; i t is expressly stated that i t shall not he anciffence for numbers to d o that which would nut be a n offence if done by one.
Mr. LEHINA : There Neems to me somo litt!e doubt as t o that. There are some five or s1x points laid down in clause 543, under which a prrsnn may be found guilty of conspiracy, in one of which i t is stated distinctly t h a t interfering with a person following his trade for a livelihood is .one. T h a t c'ause provides t h a t it is con- 8pJraCy-
(1) To prevent or defeat the execution or enforcement of any statute law ;
(2) To cuuse anv injury to the person or reputation or :my person, or to depreciate the value of any property of any person ; or
(3) To prevent or obstruct the free and Iawiiil dis- position of any property hy the owner thereof for its fair value ; or
(4) To injure any person In his trade or profession;
_"
"L
(5) To prevent or obstruct, by mesns oi any act or acts which if done by an individnal person would ConNitute an offence on his part, the free and lawful exercise by any person of his trade, pro- fession, or occupation; or
(6) To effect any n t ~ l a a f u l purpose; or
(7) To effect any lawful purpose by any uulawh If a strike took place, I am under t he impression that by the 4th subsection, or t h e 5th, n person interfering as I stated would be found g u d t g of
means.
Criminal
Code Bill.C27
&Fconspiracy, a n d sent t o 8t. Helena, where t h e unionist prisoners were. With regard t o Sir S. W. OrifEth, i t has often been remarked what a nuniberof his judgments have been upset by the F u l l Court, and that many of the Act8 he has drafted have been a source of endless litiga- tion. Therefore, in the case of a Draft Code like this, where no doubt at all should rxist, it behoves us to look into this matter very care- fully. I a m very doubtful whether theaholition of this 6th of George I V . is sufficiently well provided for. and Ishould liketo see wmraniendinent made in the clause when the Bill reaches committee.
I have alre.idy spoken of the barbaric enact,nients which will be repealed as far as Qiieensland is concerned if this Code is carried. T h e abolition of these brnt,al and barbaric relics of a n age of darkness, these remnants nf the prison gang law^, shows the tremendons advance we have made, and it is in accordance with t h e humanitarian spirit of the age, which is beginning t o make itself manifest even among lawyers, who are not very much amenahle to the movement. I trust t h a t n o member of this House will object to t h e absolute repeal of any of these dangerous enact- ments. It would be a n absurd thing for lion.
menihers t o ohjeck to therepealof such Jaws, and yet through their magistrates and judges outside impose penalties on a small boy for heating a cat.
T h e humanitarian spirit of the age is carried to such a n extent t h a t we have societies formed fnr the prevention of cruelty to animals, and the man who illtreatn a horde or tortures a cat is a s likely to go to prison a s the man who commits mandaughter. If there are any members in this House who desire the perpetuation of t h e laws towhich I have referred, I shall be very much surprised, hut I hope there a r e not. T h e humanitat ian spirit to which I have referred is carrying lawyers and judge$, in cnmmim with the ordinary ruck of humanity, along with i t ; this spirit tinda outlet in the formation of societies for, t h e purpose of helping prisoners, preventing crime, and enlarging t h e sphere of human libnrty in every respect, and for making o w punishments more humanitarian and more civilised t h a n they have beon in t h e past. This spirit is one which duriiig the past few hundred years has helped to abolish the barbaric enactment8 which visited criminala with cruel punishments. Duringtbelast300or400years there have been in England alone such 5 nuniber of cruel punishments abolished entirely and a h o - lntely a s mn8t prove conclusively to ns t h a t this spirit is particularly alive among British-speakitig people. It would surprise t h e majority of p e q ~ l e If they only knew t h e enormous number of crimes, or misdrmeanours, or mere petty offences ae they are called to-day, for which at nne time the death penalty was theordinarypnnishment. I huve referred t o several authorities during the past few days, and I tind that there were several more of offences for which the ordinary penalty was death, hut t h e statutes imposing t h m e penalties have all been repealed, and I a m glad to see t h a t in this Code we are keeping pace with the march of reform in chat direction by abolishing the death penalty for certain offences specified in t h e Code. T h e following is a list of offences which were a t one time punishable with death :-
Edward I.-Refusing to plead on arraignment.
Edwwd 11.-Breaking from prison, if the offence be capital.
Henry 111.-Marrying II woman forcibly ; imagining the death of privy councillors, Le.; soldiers deserting from the sewice, extended by Elizabeth to sailors.
Henry VIK-Highway robbery; servnnts purloining their masters' goods, value 40s.; sodomy. nrmn, or burning of houses or lauds or corn; administering poison ; sncrilege.
Edward VI.-Horse-stealing; robbing a tent or a booth in a market ; burglary or house-breaking.
MBEB.]
Cviminu2
Cde Bill. 151Elizabeth-To be seen in compnny of gipsien;
receiving, relieving, or maintaining a Popish priest ; to defend the jurisdiction of the Pope : privately stenling, or pickpockets, above one shilling; embezzling military stores, value 20s ; forgery of deeds, bol?ds, bills, or notes ; rape.
Jnnies 1.-Stabbing a person unarmed, if he died within six months ; entering into ioreigu service ;
acknowledging Anes or judgments, or sufferiug recov- eries i n another's name; concealing the death of illegitiinat,e children ; polggnmy.
Cbaries 11.-Lyinu: in w a i t for the purpose of maim- in:: a n y person. Sailors forcibly hindering their cap- tains from figbt,ing.
W i l l i a m and Mary.-Challenging above twenty per- sons; robbing a house in t,he day time, vnlue, 5s. ; shop- l t f t i n g primtely. above 5s. ; buying and receiving goods, knowing tliem to be stolen : pvrsonating bail ; buying, selling, orbaving a n y monld for coining, forging. or sel- ling counterfeit stumps; piracy, or aiding and nssisting pirates.
Anne.-Rurning ships, or otherwise dest,roging them ; attempting to prevent the succession to the Crown;
being xcceasories t o a felonious n c t ; striking or wound- ing privy councillors ; stenling from a ship in distress ; stealing in a dwelling, value, 40s.
Then, in the time of the three Georges-the infamous Georges-the offences for which a p m o n might he put to death ran u p t o twenty or thirty.
Mr. DIBLEY: T h e penalty fur using t h a t language would have been death some years ago.
Mr. LESIKA : .The offences for which death was the penalty in t h e reigns of the Georges were sqfollows :-
George I.-Rrenking down the head of a flsh pond whereby the tlsh may escape ; deer stealing, under the Blsrk Act; riots. by twelve or more, not dispersing in an hour after proclamation ; stealing fish from a pond ;
receiving a reward for helping otiiers t o stolen goods;
trading with a pirate ; maliciously shooting any person ;
seuding tbrestening let,ters ; perjury by prisoners under insolvent Acts; pulling down houses, etc.; destroying trees in an orchard or avenue ; killing. or maiming of cattle ioalicionsly ; riotously opposing the execution of legal sentence ; destroying woollen goods i n the loom ;
being at large after sentence of transporration ; three or more persons assembling riotously to protect them- selves from pnyment of their debt,%
George II.-Ste;iling lead or iron bars ; retnrniog from transportation ; bankrupts refusing to surrender, or concealing tlieir effects. viilue $211 ; demolishing river or sen banks; c u t t i n g hop binds; demolish- ins turnoikes or Aoodeates: aettine fin: to coal mines:
stealing 'cattle or shbep ; 'stealini bonds, bills, bank:
notes, ctc. ; gilding a shilling t o make it look like a guinea ; 8tenliug of linen irom bleaching ground;
smuggling by persons armed, or attempting to rescue smneglera : steriliug over 40s. on a river; attempting to reecne a miirderer ; refusing t o pt,rform quarantine;
stealing from ships in distress ; making false entries in registers relating to marriages ; agreeing to enter into forpip service-
Every one nf the Iriehmen in the Transvaal who have volunteered to assist the Transvaal against the British Government would be hanged under t h a t if they were brought to England-
forging seamen's wills ; forging tlie hand of receiver of port fines.
George 111.-Stealing naval stores ; coining a half- penny or a lartbiiig; selling cottons with forged stampa ;
destroying silk or velvet in the loom; robbery of the mail ; stenling bauk notes from letters ; uttering counterleit money, third offence ; frame-breaking, etc.
For all those offences, with the exception of piracy, murder, and treason, the death penalty has now been aholished, and the abolition of the death penalty in those numerous cases has been due t o the active and persistent agitation of men who believed t h a t t h e proper wily to fuppress crime was not to mutilate the offender, or sub- ject him to cruel punishments. I n t h e abolition of the death penalty for such offences as those I have enumerated w e see the resulcs of the self.denyi-ng labours of t h e friends of hnmnnity, the'toiling reformers who, century after century, have done their share of t h e work of abolishing the detestable and unwarrantably
-0riminal Code
Bill. [ASSEMBLY.] Qriminal
Cod0Bit.?.
cruel brutalities, then called judicial punish- ment$. And a t every stage of the battle, t h e abolitionists were met with the cry t h a t the pro- posed change would subvert morality, s a p t h e foundations of society, and, as Boawell said of the proposal to aboliBh t h e slave trade,
Shut the gates of mercy on mankind.
I have pointed out now a list of offences and crimes for which t h e death penalty [7 p.m.1 was theordinary punishment during t h e past 400 years. I have referred t o quite a number of petty offences for which t h a t was the penalty, but through the epirit of humanitarian feeling and modern Christianity, and t h e influence due to the teaching of moral philosophy, we have come t n regard human life as a much moresacred thing than it was regarded in t h e past, i n consequence of which our criminal laws have undergone many very far-reaching changes. Continuing t h a t subject, I would point out that, not only in the case of a number of important as wrll as trivial offences has the penalty of death been abolished, but there are other offences to which i t wa,s originally attache?, b u t for which now we not only apply no pnnish- ment whatever, b u t we actually treat them i n the.kindest possible fashion. Fcr instance, i t was the custom in the times to which I refer t o flog lunatics and persons suffering from infectious diseases, such as small~~ox-to treat them as if they were the most cold-blooded criminals. All were treated as criminals. To go mad was crime ; to express hetcrodox opinions was crime, and the heretic was either hanged, flogged, or roasted alivk. The infliction of penalties by “law and order” upon lunatics and people suffering from various kinds of diseases was not only a regular practice, hut i t was profitable, and deemed a fairly honourable thing t o do. I will quote a case in point to show how these things operated amongst the people. I have here a reckoning taken from some old docnment relating to the municipal affairsof Canterhury, and dated 1585-
To bringing one heretic from London, 14s. ad.
One and a-half loads of wood to burn him, 2 s . Qun powder, Id.
One stake and staple, 6d. Total, 17s. 58.
That is the cost of puttrng to death one heretic.
We do not treat heretic8 in that wa.y now. Puhlic opinion has got ahead of t h a t method uf treating people who hold different opinions t o onr own.
Then, as we have made progress in t h a t direction so we have made piogress in other directions, and taken steps in the direction of reform which were urgently needed. T o acquire an infectious dis- ease or an infectious complaint a couple of hundred years ago was a very serious offence.
A t five minutes past 7 o’clock,
Mr. MOORE called attention to the state of Quorum formed.
Mr. L E S I N A : I was saying that to acqnire any infectious discme or cumplaint was a. very serious offence. Giving way to delirium was regardcd as a crime, and the victim suffering from such disease was put upon a wheel and byoken, or was subject t o t h e penalty of whip.
ping. I n the parish constable’s account of 1710 a t Great Staunton in Huntingdon there was this entry-
Pd Thomas Hawkins for whipping two people that had the small-pox, Ed.
and in 1714-
Pd for watching, victuals, and drink for Mary Mitchell, 2s. 66. ; Pd Por whipping her, 4d.
Y e t t h e people who ordered and performed these atrocities were not destitute of hnmanity, b u t were gravely wanting in perception.
the House.
T h e SECRETARY FOR
PUBLIC
LANDS : Owiug to irritation probably.T h e SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : A vigorous form of massage.
Mr. L E S I N A : I presume that the people who ordered those barbarities were kind-hearted people, and a t their own firesides would compare very favourably with the niodern Christian. I sup- pose they were just as kind-hearted and well- meaning astheSecretaryfor Agriculture; b u t t h a t wes t h e custom of the time. I t was t h e s t a t e of public feeling which connived not only a t t h e passage of legislation of t h a t kind, but sym- pathised with the infliction of such penalties.
There were other horrors practised which I shall make only passing referencc to. If, as some of these people believed, i t was possible to abolish crime by the infliction of Devere penalties, then all crime should surely have dis- appeared by this time. If the infliction of such horrors as were perpetrated in the reign of Henry VIII. would abolish crime, surely it mufit have been wiped off the face of his dominions altogether ! Henry VIII., in the twentysecond year of his reign, made treason a capital offence, and the penalty was heing boiled to death. T h a t did not abolish t,reason, and in later years they imposed the more humane punishmei-*t of beheading fc2r that offence. T h e wooden-hcaded Charles I. they beheaded, and t h a t was only one of t h e many atrocious cruelties of t h e time. I n looking back over the record of t h e past couple of hundred gears, we have acconnts of maiming and mutilation of the most atrocinus character for all sorts of offences- mutilation of t h e eyes, lips, nose, hands, and tongue, besides another nameless form of muti- latinn. Men were disembowelled for treason, hung, drawn, and quartered for all manner of offences ; women weie disembowelled and burnt.
T o be hanged, drawn, and quartered was common. Englishwnmen were bnrnt f o r witch- craft, and for all kinds of treason, whether poisoning a husband or defaming the Qneen.
T h e SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: W h a t are you quoting from?
Mr. L E S I N A : I am quoting the facts of history; I am not quoting anybody. I have simply niade a list of the various punishments inflicted a t various times in years past-and I want to point out that t h e imposition of many of these penaltie$-inflicted a t onetimeoranother by well-meaning persons with the idea t h a t in t h a t manner crime would be put down-has failed in its effect. And just as we become more civilised and more Christianised, we take a more lenient view of the punishment whicli i t is desirable t o inflict, and as a result we hecome more moral and more law-abiding than if we inflict t h e severe penalties which were inflicted in olden times. I n putting these facts forward I want t o make the ground firm under my feet for the etand I intend tc take against capital punishment and flogging being inflicted a t this, the end of t h e nineteenth century.
The SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LAXDS : Or any other punishment, I should think.
Mr. L E S I N A : No. I speak of those two punishments because they are punishments by mutilation, which a r e altogether foreign t o civilised ideas of punishment. Especially is t h a t so if we look a t the matter from a scientific point of view, or from the point of view of the eminent criminologists, who tell 11s t h a t crime is merely a diseabe-that no erson wilfully and in a depraved spirit greaks t h e law because he hopes t o profit hy it.
Next we find chat instead of disembowelling criminals, instead of being hanged, drawn, and quartered, they are hanged only, and that for
murder alone. Here in Queensland we han them for murder, for treason, a n d for piracy.
f
can quote a t least a dozen countries in t h e civilised world where the death penalty has been abolished, without any iucreaae in crime-in fact, there has been a n absolute decrease, as figures can show. W h o can say t h a t if we abolish the penalty of hanging, t h a t we might not be as well off as we are to-day. I would like to point out t o the gallows advo- cates in this House-to those who advocate t h e rope, the cat, and the triangle-to thnse who advocate torture and punishment by mutilation, t h a t all down the centuries, as history shows, we have been slowly, gradually, b u t surely and quietly redeeming onr reputation for t h e imposi- tion of the cruel punishments practised by our forefathers. W e have been gradually lessening the severity of punishments. Whereas, in olden times, we burned men, boiled men, hanged, drew, a n d quartered human heinga, now we simply hang them. I would like to point out this also to the gallows advocates i n this House, and I would like t o ask the Hon. the Attorney-General whether he can say t h a t t h e repeal of this laat penalty-the death penalty and the flogging of criminals-might not be as wise as t h e previous abolition? H a d we t h e same moral courage as our ancestors, we would certainly abolish a11 forms of punishment by mutilation. I t was not only for ordinary offences-for petty offences against property and t h e person, or for great crimes like mnrder and treason-that t h e death penalty wa.4 imposed. W e have evidence t h a t t h e most atrocious penalties were imposed for offences-so-called-which we mighc not regard as offences a t all, and which would be re- garded by a philosophical mind as a disti?ct advance in our modern civilisation. F o r in- stance, in t h e reign of Charles I., instances are recorded which really equal in flagitious- ness the deeds of Nero. T h e pillory, whip- ping, branding, cutting off t h e ears, grew into use by degrees. I may refer t o one well-known historical case-that of Prynne, who was muti- lated for printing a puritanical book-a religious work-an offence, in those times, which was considered very dangerous, and which might be regarded as equalling rufianism in these days. T h e punishment inflicted on Prynne by t h e S t a r Chamber was t h a t he should stand twice in t h e pillory, to be branded on the forehead, to lose buth his ears, t o pay a fine of E5,000, and suffer perpetual imprisonment. And w h y ? Simply because he published a religious work which contained principles adverse to t h e ruling religious principles of the day. We don’t do t h a t kind of thing in our days. And are we a n y t h e worse off? When it was propwed in those days t o abolish t h a t kind of punishment, there were no doubt scores of people-men like the Secretary for Lands, the Secretarv for Agriculture, and t h e Attorney-General, whose breasts throbbed with the milk of human kindness, but who thought t h a t all civilised society would be subverted; t h a t social chaos would follow if these punishments were abolished. B u t t h e world is more civilised now; a t any rate, i t is no worse o f f by t h e abolition of these barbarous penalties. Again, others for small kinds of offences were whipped, cheeks slit open, and red-hot brands applied to their faces twice a week for a fortnight. There a r e cases on record in which these extremes were reached. I will cite one case, which the Attorney General, no doubt, being a lawyer, will be well acquainted with. A child was sentenced to death for steal- ing paint valued a t 2s. 2d.
T h e ATTORNEY-GENERAL : W h y harrow our feelings with these horrors ? They have nothing t o do with the Bill.
Mr. LESINA : They have, and I will tell you why. T h e judges and magistrates inflicted these punishments because they thought they were doing the right thing ; that by their action they would terrorise the people into keeping t h e peace -to keep “ law and order,” and they carried out those laws relentlessly. I want to show t h a t by the abolition of these cruel punishments society has not suffered. So, why should we not go further and aholish mutilation, flog- ging, and hanging. If we do that, we will take our place among t h e most civilised nations of the world. There is another case on record, which happened in the year 1787, in Worcestershire, England, where thirteen men and women were conveyed t o the gallows one bright morning and hanged, not one of whom had committed murder. Yet in Queensland, if you hang one man, i t creates a sensation. Does not t h a t show our progress? The inferior punieh- ments I will briefly refer to :-In the horough towns there were t h e tumbrel for such as pilfering millers, the cucking stool for scold ing wives, the brank for taming shrews, t h e cage or pillory, the skimmington, and t h e stccks for all. Inimorality was punished sometimes by the stocks and a whipping.
But that dots not complete the list of horrors our ancestors inflicted on their unfortunate fellow creatures. For instance, for the stealing of a sheep or the killing of a deer, hosts of excru- cjating tortures were inflicted t o extort confey- sions. History tells this. Besides the “hoot
’
and t h e rack there were a number of inferior engines of oppression. I n t h a t connection, i t will be remembered t h a t Cardinal Wolsey was a t one time placed in the stocks for drunkenness -a man a t the mention of whose name most of us would he inclined t o raise our hats. There were ala0 punishments of the dark house, or dungeon, the drunkards’
clock, th9 whipping post, entries in the Hustings hook, branding, and all sorts of arbitrary fines and imprisonment. Coming down to our times i n New South Wales, Victoria, and Tas- mania, during the present century-forty, fifty, sixty, or seventy years ago-we find that it was not an uncommon thing for numbers of men t o be hanged before breakfast on Gallows Hill, or on the site of the Barley Mow Hotel, Castlereagh street, SI dney. There one morning seventeen human beings were launched into eternity-their old friends about, drinking, smoking, cursing and swearing-a public execution for the main- tenance of public order, and i n the sacred cause bf the protection of property. But we have abolished that. Here we don’t always carry out the death penalty, and juries are loth to:convict on circumstantial evidence. T h a t is the result of the wide spread of educntion and the greater regard for hnman life. If the Government don’t show regard for human life, then t h e average man will take pattern by the Governuient. I am glad t o see the elimination of sections 466, 4G7, and 470, relating to t,he Game Laws, as being unnecessary in Queensland. These laws were for many years a fertile sourceof punishment in t h e old country.
Even in recent times in England there have been a great inany cases under this head. If a man took an egg out of the nest of certain birds he was visited with theimprisonment of a year and a day.
Killing o r wounding any deer in a n y park or enclosed ground was by a statute of George I.
punished by transporlation t o the plantations for seven years. Scores of human beings for a petty offence like that, which we smile a t to-day, or which would be punished, if a t all, by t h e infliction of two or three months’ imprisonment ---scores of people were sent to the unhealthy plantations in South America for a period of five, six, or seven years. All these laws had an object. Their object was t o reform men’s morals ;
184
Criminal Code Bill. [AS[JBMBLP.] Cra’minat Code Bill.
t o make them better by deterring from crinie or frightenipg them into living virtuous lives a n d respectin t h e civil code. R u t it did not succeed. %here we hang one man to-day, they hung seventeen then. T h e y hung a man for stealing a horse. W e d o not hang a man for stealing a horse ; a n d I do not know that the crime is committed any oftener than it u s e d t o be. I say t h a t society is t h e gainer by the change. The legislator8 of tha t day, very much like those of to-day i n some instances, were moral reformers who believed, like the Secretary for Lands, t h a t the faggot, the cat, and t h e rope were essentida in t h e government of men a n d t h e regulation of social affairs.
T h e SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS : You do not think I would advocate anything of the sort.
Mr. L E S I N A : T h e judge who donned t h e black cap and sentenced a young girl to be hnng for stealing goods from a shop in the daytime valued at 5s., or t h e man who killed a deer or destroyed a tree in a n orchard or a n avenue, or was guilty of some other petty offence which we now dismins with a few months’
imprisonment, doubtless considered that h e was upholding the fabric of social order-preserving society against t h e forces of anarchy. A n d he a n d his fellows in and ont of Parliament from t h a t day u p to t h e present time fought like Trojans against the proposals t o mitigate the seveiity of the English Criminal Code. Did they succeed ? Did they make men more moral or greater re-pecters of law and order? Did punishment by multilation, hanging, flogging, burning, boiling, slitting the cheeks-did any of those things succeed in checking crime? D i d those brutal a n d detestable judicial puiiish- ments i n t h e old day8 ever deter men from stealing sheep? W e know they did n o t ; we know t h a t they had a different effect altogether, as I have shown already. I n t h e early days w e find the grossest practices resorted t o for the pun- ishment of offenders agn,inst the then civil code ; and t h e Attorney-General and the Secretary for Lands, as students of Roman and Grecian his- tory, are well aware of the awful agonies suffered b y the law-breakers in those times. B u t a4 the world progressed and the philoflophers and moral reformers began to have a widespread influence i n elevating human character, these severe penalties were in some degree reduced. Yet as we have Been for many hundreds of years, these brutalities, which were then called judicial punishments, were committed on offender-.
England, which is the freest of all fhe nations of the world from cold-blooded, wicked laws, still had as incidents to her polity provisions for punishment which a later age condemned as detestable and unwarrantably cruel. I n France.
a n d many ot,her continental countries, precisely t h e aame kind of thing prevailed-the most brutal punishments were inflicted for all sorts of petty offences.
Mr. STEWART : So i t is in Spain to-day.
Mr. L E S I N A : Yes-Spain, Italy, Russia, and other places. These punishments, inflicted with such extreme cruelty, gradually excited a deep impression of s mpathy and resentment in the nation. From t x e time of the glorious revo- lution, when, as I have already pointed out, K i n g Charles lost his wooden head, t h e nation began, aided by t h e Press, to condemn punish- ment by mutilation as fareign t o right and British feeling. They recognised-as we must recognise, and whnt we certainly ought t o recognise before this Bill becomes a Queens- land statute, and ns I hope the Attorney- General will recognise
-
that, apart from the lowering of the nation itself, t h e sufferer isperpetually debased. It also became acknow- ledged-and I think this much will be admitted even by the Secretary for Lands-as a con- stitutional principle t h a t t h e natural consequence of harsh a n d cruel restrictive laws is to aggravate the crimes or disaffection which have swved for their pretext, and t h a t the legislature has still t o pass on a n d enact fresh laws of even greater severity. I havc mid that the brutality of these inhuman laws graclually excited a deep impression of sympathy a n d resentment ; and this feeling was not only confined t o England ; i t went also throughout the continent of Europe, a n d in many parts of Europe, like France, thi3 feeling took such hold upon the puhlic mind that, aidedbymenlikevictor Hugoand reformers of that calibre, attempts were made to reduce the severity of the penalties imposed upon criminals guilty of all sorts of offences against property a n d the person.
The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : They can stand more refoim in Prance now.
Mr. L E S I N A : Vndoubtedly ; but reformers are met by men who won’t move forward.
Victor Hugo, who was one of the-
T h e SECRETARY YOR AGRICULTURE : Victor Hugn is dead now.
Mr. L E S I K A :
.
Victor Hugo is dead, but Victor Hugo lives in his works, as is well known by those who have read Victor Hugo’s “ L e e Miiierables”; and we cannot help loving and reverencing the man for t h e work he has done.Some admirers of Victor Hugo may not know the story of what induced him t o take up this work, and I will give i t in his cwn words :-
A t Paris, he says, in 1818 or 1819, on a summer’s day towards 12 o’clock at noon, I was passing by the square of Ihe I’alaceof Justice. A cron-d was assembled there around a post. 1 drew near. To thia post was tied a young female with a collar round her neck and a writing over her bead. A chafing dish Pull of burning coals was on the ground in rront or her; an iron in-trument w i t h a wooden handle was placed on the live coals a i d was being heated there. Tile orowid looked perfectly satisfied.
year was t h a t ?
This mToman was guilty of what the law calls domestic theft. As the clocli struck noon, behind that woman, and without being seen by her, a man slipped np t o the post. I bad noticed that the jacket worn by this woriian had an opening behin I kept together by stringy ;
the man quickly untied these, drew aside the jacket, exposed the woman’s back as far a8 her waist, seized the iron which was in the fire, and applied it, leaning heavily on her shoulder. J 0th the iron and the wrist of the executioner clisappeared in the thick white snioke. This is now over forty years ago, but there still rings in my ears the horrible shriek of this wretched creature. To me she had been a thief, now she was a martyr. I waa then sixteen years of age, and I left the place determined t o combat to the last days of my life these cruel deeds of law.
A n d he fulfilled his promise, and he did work in France for t h e an;elioration of t h e condition of t h e criminal and reducing the severity of the punishments for offences against property and against the person-a work only equalled in England by Wilberforce, and Howard, the prison reformer. W h a t has been done in our time-
Mr. DAWSON : Or, Zola to-day.
Mr. L E S J N A : T h e work commenced by t,hefie great men-Victor Hugo, Wilberforce, HowarJ, and others, a n d carried on by their RuccessorR t o thepresent year of grace, 1899, has resulted in the brightening of the moral tone of society. There can be no que-tion about that.
Themoraltoneof societyis brighterto-day than i t was when a woman might he partially undressed in public, and have her back branded, just like you brand a steer. T h e moral tone has improved since we abolished those detestable and brutal punishments, a n d t h a t is why to-night I am T h e SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : W h a t Mr. L E S I N A : 1819.
Crimina2 Code B i A [27 SEPTEXBEB.] Crimina2 Code Bill. 156
appealing for t h e abolition of t h e last two vestiges of punishment by mutilation, thelaah and the gallowa ; I would like t o see them abolished.
We have excellent precedents established by various other countries of the civilised world ; precedents to go upon. W e have not only the humanitarian spirit of the age which urges ecery man of right feeling to strive for t h e abolition of these brutal punishments, hut we have t h e precedents established by various other countries of t h e civilised world-people like ourselves sprung from somewhat the same stock as our- selves, and who to-day have abolished this last dread penalty, the death penalty. T h e criminal code has been humanised b the efforts of .these men, and t h e best proof I xave t h a t t h e work is still going on and is working a .quiet revulution i n the hearts and minds of judges, magis- trates, and legislators is t o be found in the Draft Code submitted for the consideration of this House by the Attorney-General to-night.
Splendid progress has been made.
[7’30 p.m.1 There can beno question about that.
To what is it t o be attributed ? T h e domestic warfare of our forefathers, t h e fire of the forward movement, the love of justice and mercy have brought the English Criminal Code to-day down with only two systems of punishment by mutilation-two relics of cruel, barbarous, and detestable ages. I refer to the degrading punish- ment of gaol whipping and t h e extreme penalty of death. I n looking through this Code, I find t h a t t h e number of several punishments is nine :-1, death ; 2, imprisonment with hard labour ; 3, imprisonment in irons; 4, imprisiin- ment without hard labonr ; 5, detention in an in- dustrial or reformatory school; 6, solitary con- finement; 7, whipping; 8, fine; 9, finding security t o keep the peace. I t is ex ressly pro- vided in this Act-it is a long stepinyong-looked- for reform-that whipping cannot be inflicted on a woman. Y e t less than 100 years ago women were flogged and branded like steers openly in the market-place.
An HONOURABLE MEMBER : Some want flog- gin yet.
8,.
LESTNA : I now see the law expressly provides t h a t they shall not be flogged-it does not matter what crime they may bp guilty of.I s not t h a t a long step in advance? Though this Bill expressly provides t h a t they shall be exempt from this hideous punishment, the backs of their brothers may be mutilated.
T h e SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS : Where is th at said ?
Mr. L E S I N A : B u t they will become rarer and rarer as time goes bv. T h e Dunishments of boiling alive, roasting” alive, drawing and quartering, branding, torturing, dieembowelling, beheading, slitting the cheekp, maiming, lopping the ears, t h e tongue, the nose, blinding, racking, and certain nameless forms of mutilation prac- tised upon wretched criminals by our well- meaning but barbarous forefathers have dis- appeared from our statute-book ; b u t we still retain t h e lash and t h e gallows-two relic8 of cruel, barbarous, and detestable ages. Y e t all the others were considered necessary fur t h e welfare and continuance of society. I suppose t h a t if anyone had got tip and proposed t h a t t h e law which permitted women to be mutilated for petty offences should be abolished, persons like the
H ; : .
t h e Minister for Lands would h a r e said, You want t o upset society, overturn things in general, and destroy t h e guarantee of our person and property now given by this law”; b u t t h e groans of prophets of doom of t h a t character were allowed t o pass unnoticed, and these hideoiis forms of infliction were abolished once and for all. Still, society goes qiiietly on its way rejoicing, and we are n o worse off, if we are no better. Then t h e inflictionof these horrid judicial punishments-the calm, cool, deliberate Rtrangulation of a human being, or the cutting off slices froin the quivering back of a moral idiot-is, t o niy mind, inexpressibly shncking, and in direct opposition to the trend of mi)dern thought and usage when dealing with crime. Loinhroso and Professor Carrara say-
The SECRETARY FOR AGRICULTURE : I t is all i n t h e library.
Mr. L E S I N A : Yes, they are authorities who have written on the subject. I am Riirpriaed t h a t the Minister for Lands, if he has rend these works, is not more i n c h e d t o feel leniently towards-
T h e SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LANDS : If I did not feel very leniently I should have gone out of this Chamber long ago.
Mr. L E S I N A : T h e criminal is riot a wild beast, although t h a t appears to have been the view taken of him all through history. I t may be a subject’ of considerable humour t o t h e Minister for Lands as well as to other members t h a t a man should be strangled who has com- mitted a crime. Possibly he takes his pleasureR, like most Englishmen, sadly, and, if he has a day o f f , would soouer go t o an execution than t o a picnic. T h e view I take of the matter ia entirely different. My view of the criniinal is t h a t . h e is an erring brother whose feet have wandered from t h e narrow path which we all weakly strive to follow. My contention is that the criminal should be punished nndoubt- edly. I have no sympathy with murderers or others who commit outrages any more than I have with those who got into t h e Queensland National Bank for 610,000. They are all crimi- nals. But to take his life is not the way to cure him ; you only brutalise him. I t has been con- demned hy history as a failure. If t h e magis- trates who love the ceremunial of the double bench would consider f i x a little the causes of crime and the effect of punishment by mntila- tion, they would exercise a kinder and more beneficiai influence. If the judges who coolly don the black cap would consider a little on the awful- ness and senselesanessof judicial murder, the tone of society would be morally brightened, and t h e last vestiges of bygone criminal law extinguirihed.
If they would conaider the awful sacredness of human life, the,y would not be so ready to hang criniinals as they are to.day. They should con- sider t h e cause of crime. Crime is largely a social product ; it is very largvly t h e outcome of our present social conditions. I t s great breeding grounda are the highly-centralised cities of niudern industrial society. It is due t o the awful economic and industrial conditions which are the product of our systems of monopoly, caused by many of the unjust laws which pro- duce these monopolies, encourage and strengthen them, and bring about such conditions of life a8 result in crime. B u t the alteration of our social conditions and our industrial conditions are reforming influenced which will have the result of reducing crime. I have said t h a t crime is a Rocial product, and that its great breeding grounds are the highly-centralised cities of modern, iudustiial snciety. Because of certain economic causes, offences against the person, against property, drunkenness, &c., flourinh rankly in all big cities. Ignorance is also a fruitful cause of crime.
A n HONOURABLE MEMBER : T h a t is personal.
Mr. L E S I N A : It is not personal. I have
“ Queensland P a s t and Present ” for 1897, which undoubtedly proves this. It says-
Ignorance is upparently a greater cause oPcrimethan poverty. The records of the magistrates’ courts show that of the 11,899 males and 1.278 females taken into custody during 1896, newly one-half or the males and more than one-third of the females possessed no ednca- tion, or only that of a most rudimentary character.
166 Oriminal
CodeBill. [A8SEMBLT
.]Cviminat
CodsBill.
Then there is a table.
Although a slight difference exists betweenthe terms uned in the census schedules and those adopted for the criminal stutistios. yet they are sufficiently agreed to enable a very Pair comparison to be made. Thus males of imperfect or of no education contrihuterl to the criminal class in more than t w o and a-half times the proportion that tbeir number in the popuhtion would justify. On the part of the females the difference w3s still more pronounced, for, whilst the census figures showed 8’46 ns the percentage of illiterate women in the population, there were 33’05 of that class found amongst those arrested during the year.
That shows that the persms who are illiterate contribute considerably more than their rightful percentage t,o the total of the crime conimitted in the colony-chat ignorance is a fruitful source of crime and a much more fruitfulsource of crime than poverty.
Mr. MAXWELL : Slow policemcn.
Mr. L E S I N A : Perhaps they are a n element, hut the statistician has not taken them into consideration, but these people were not too fast for the police. We have what is called the habitual criminal-the man who has, a s Mr. Gladstone put it, a kink in his moral orqanisation-the man whose pathological condition is one of habitual criminality. Dr. Caesar Lomhroso, his pupil, Mario Carara, Professor Pellman, Surgeon- Captain Buchanan, Havelock Ellis, and other experts in the new science of criminology,’ have shown that to punish habitual criminals of either sex by hanging, flogging, or torture is abont a8 sensible as punishing the lunatic or a smallpox patient for his affliction-a thing which our ancestors used to do. They show that habitual criminals must be dealt with in a scientific manner. Our treatment to-day is largely punitive instead of being also reformative.
Modern experts in the science of criminology assert t h a t we will never settle the problem of crime and dealing with criminals until we make our punishments not only punitive but reforma- tive, preventive, and scientific. To lash a man, to peel pieces off his back, or to “scrag” him, and thus place him beyond the reach of good <,r evil for all eternity, is not the proper way of dealing with a man who is inclined to he criminal.
H e ismorally diseased. H e may be in other respects a perfect man, hut he is intellectually little more than a moral idiot 1 and there are examples t h a t I can give of this. I will give one example which I know will cause a certain amount of interest in the minds of hon. members, and that i.3 the case of Luccheni, the anarchist, who lately assassinated the Austrian Empress. Now, Lom- hroso, who is uiiirersally known as an authority on these matters, Lomhroso-the great Italian criminologist-discovered that Luccheni is the son of a prostitute; his father is a criu~inal; and several of his ancestors have been inmates of reformative institutions, showing that heredity to a large extent helped in the production of this extraordinary criminal. And that the man is no more responsible for his morally diseaaed con- d i t i o ~ ~ than the man who sickens of smallpox or typhus fever, and yet he is punished by some punishment such as we propose i n this Code.
H e is just as much diseased a6 the lunatic whom our ancestors punished by flogging.
T h e ATTORNEY-GENERAL : W h a t would you do with him ?
Mr. L E S I N A : I would perpetually imprison him, as has been done with him.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL : That is punishment.
Mr. L E S I N A : H e committed t h e crime in one of the Cantons of Switzerland, where capital punishment has been abolished, and he has been immured for life in a dungeon.
The SECRETARY FOR AGRICCLTURE : You say he is not responsible-he cannot help it.
Mi-. L E S I N A : B u t i t does not follow that because you recognise that a criminal is morally
Then i t goes on to say- irresponsible for the crime which he commits t h a t you must let him loose on society. I recognise that the tiger is irresponsible, and that ha obeys certain natural in8tinct.s in attacking the first person or animal t h a t he comes across, but that is no argument why I should let him obey those natural indtincts. I must place i t out of his power to do so, and the way to do that is to place him in perpetual imprisonment,. That is.what society should do, acting in the light of science, because crime is largely the outcome of our social conditions. Our laws have pro- duced large numhers of criminals ; and to make those criniinals responsible, and punish them for doing what they cannot help doing is unjust to them and unjust .to society, and it also produces ill results. Lombroqo, not very long ago, wrote a book called “ The Female Offender.” This hook, which deals with woman as a crimina.], is not altogether an exhilarating volnme. I t does not act on the spirits like chRm- pagne, but it contains an enormone amount of information, which, if the House would specially study it, would have the effect of bringing about many important alterations in our treatment of female criminals. Lomhroso gives some startling cases of crimes committed by females that revea,l a fiendish atrocity.
The lustiflcation as well as the value of the book lies in its constituting a mas3 nf evidence, gathered with infinite labour and scientific hccuracy, hearing on the ps, chological and other causes of crime amongst women.
Professor Pellman, of Berlin, puts forward R fearful statement which he compiled after having made a special study of hereditary drimkenness in Germany. The prJfessor has taken certain individual cases a generation or two hack, arld has traced the career of children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren, in all parts of the present German Empire, until he has been able to present tabulated biographies of the hundreds descended from some original drunkard. The last person whom Professor Pellman has thus pilloried in medical literature is F r a u Ada Turke. She was born in the first half c i f the century, and she was a drunkard, a thief, and a tramp for forty years of her life, which ended in 1880. Her descendants have numbered 833, of whom 709 have been traced by the professor in local records frum youth to death. Of these 709 he found 102 were illegitimate, there were 142 beggars, and sixty-four more lived on charity.
‘Of the women 181 led disrepntable lives. There were in this family seventy-six convicts, seven of whom were sentenced to death for murder.
I n seventy-five years this one family piled up a hill of costs in cxrectiimal institutions which totalled g250,000, all of which the law-abiding taxpayers have had to pay. Here is the product of one criminal woman. If that woman had been placed in an inebriated home, or in some kind of correctional institution for the term of her natural life, the taxpayers of Germany would have been saved that g250,OOO.
The SECI~ETARY FOR AGRICULTURE: Not a t all-there would have been a deputation to the Home Secretary to let her go.
Mr. L E S I N A : Not a hit. If we had correc- tional institutions in whlch we could imprison such women, where they would he scientifically treated, and where all kinds of reforming and corrective influences would be hroiight to bear upon them, society would save it,self very heavy tax hills, and i t would also prevent womenof this stamp from giving birth indirectly to such a n u m - ber of criminals. There is another case which occurs to my mind--a case mentioned by Bcr- hert Spencer, in a collection of essays called
“ T h e Man versus the State.” I n speaking of the sins of legislators-and I commend this work
One reviewer hays-
