The Shadow of Great Britain

659: Chapter 322 Playing Good Cop, Bad Cop_2 659: Chapter 322 Playing Good Cop, Bad Cop_2 But even to the liberally progressive Whig Party, Brougham seemed too liberal and progressive.

Even within the already left-leaning Whig Party, Brougham belonged to the radical left wing.

At the legal level, the young Brougham had already been one of the ardent followers of the legal reformer Samuel Romilly.

In terms of human rights, he was an active supporter of the abolition movement’s initiator, William Wilberforce.

In education, he was one of the earliest voices in Britain calling for public education.

Not content with mere slogans, although unable to shift Parliament’s views, Brougham nonetheless co-founded the University of London with several likeminded friends through fundraising efforts.

As for politics, Brougham was a staunch supporter of Parliamentary reform, and the kind not even ten mules tied to his neck could hold back.

Perhaps it was precisely because of Brougham’s radical thinking and his capacity for action that despite his early joining of the Whig Party, and a not insignificant social reputation, it wasn’t until 1810 that the Whig Party, in desperate need of candidates, officially selected him as a prospective member of Parliament.

Neither the verbal abuse from the supporters of Keats nor the vicious attacks of his political enemies ever made the High Chancellor change his expression.

Such a willful personality was almost entirely opposite to Viscount Melbourne’s, who was so moderate and lazy that he was reluctant to engage in disputes with others.

Therefore, when Viscount Melbourne visited the Lord Chancellor’s office today, he was fully prepared for a potential rebuff.

After all, the matter he was about to raise with Brougham, to some extent, was tantamount to a blatant disrespect for the authority of the court.

However, to his surprise, Brougham agreed immediately.

“Actually, even if you hadn’t come to me, I would have suggested granting a Royal Pardon,” said Brougham.

“Hmm?” Viscount Melbourne raised his eyebrows in surprise, “What’s the reason for that?”

Lord Brougham began, “Well, this matter is still in the planning stages, but since we’ve touched upon it, I’ll make it clear.

Everyone knows that these years I have been supporting Sir Romilly’s call for criminal law reform.

Although Sir Peel, during his term, has greatly advanced the work of abolishing the ‘Bloody Act.’ Now, Britain’s capital punishment entries have been reduced from 222 to 56, but in my view, some of the capital punishment statutes still need careful consideration.

For example, the hanging penalty for 42 types of forgery crimes is inappropriate.

Although in 1830, Parliament passed a bill reaffirming the necessity of capital punishment for these forgeries, in practice, Sir Radzinowicz and I found that over the past year, not a single criminal has been executed for committing forgery.

Sir Radzinowicz frankly said, ‘The discrepancy between legal text and legal practice may be more shocking.’

The jury disagrees with taking a life for forgery, and there are many judges who consider the punishment too severe.

To avoid taking a life, the jury often reaches a verdict of not guilty.

If this trend continues, then such a law is as good as null and void.

For this reason, I have been considering replacing those disproportionately harsh penalties with milder but more certain punishments.

A law that gains public approval is one that can truly be enforced, and only when enforceable can it truly be called a law.

Otherwise, it’s no different from Keats’s verses.”

“Keats’s verses?”

“Yes,” Lord Brougham said, taking a sip of his drink, “they look magnificent but are essentially just whining without any real effect.”

Upon hearing this, Viscount Melbourne finally relaxed and laughed, lifting his glass, “Appointing you as High Chancellor was indeed a correct decision.

If the Lord Chancellor’s office decides to continue to push for judicial reform, the Home Office will certainly offer its full support.”

At this point, Brougham suddenly spoke up, “But as you said, even though His Majesty the King will grant clemency to some and commute to a lesser punishment, the court’s verdict must still be in accordance with the original statutes.

A sentence of hanging must still be declared as such in court.

If leniency starts in the courtroom, it would amount to encouraging revolt, and then the majesty and sanctity of law cannot even begin to be addressed.

This time is an act of grace from His Majesty the King, but it shall not set a precedent.”

“I think the same,” said Viscount Melbourne with a smile, “Having the King play this benevolent role is sure to please him immensely.

Speaking of which, it seems that the current His Majesty the King is quite different from his brother.

He is naturally compassionate, embracing humanitarianism.

I’ve heard that every time the Old Bailey sends a death sentence for His Majesty’s approval, he always reviews it several times, orders the judges to present the case directly to him, before he is willing to sign his name.

Last year, the King personally commuted the death sentences in nearly ninety percent of the cases.”

Lord Brougham joked, “With His Majesty’s help, your daily work must be much lighter, isn’t it?

If he were as indolent as the former King, according to tradition, it would usually fall to the Home Secretary to confirm the death sentences.”

Viscount Melbourne laughed lightly, “You’re right, perhaps the King knows of my lazy nature and that not everyone has Sir Peel’s energy.

He is always considerate of his subjects, whether it be the Home Secretary or his old brothers from the Royal Navy.”