themselves to the completion of the offender's purpose, are those ingredients in crime which properly warrant the infliction of a rigorous punishment; and that, in truth, the very exposure of the property, and facility of depredation, which has been made a ground for severity, does palliate the moral guilt of the culprit. It is obvious, that this principle directly applies to the case of forging drafts and acceptances: forgeries of bank notes must be perpetrated with more deliberation, as the copper-plate must be prepared. It seems to us farther worthy of remark, that the individuals guilty of private forgery, form precisely that description of individuals whom it may be supposed most easy to reform. Yet they form, also, that description of criminals, on whom the sentence of the law is with the greatest constancy and certainty inflicted. There can be no doubt, that the principles of the least criminal pickpocket, apprehended within any twelve months, are far more corrupt, and that it must prove far more difficult to reclaim him, and to establish in his breast principles of virtue and morality, than would be found to be the case with regard to almost any of the individuals executed for forgery, within the same time. If such be, as we believe, the fact, it does certainly deserve deep consideration. The Report of the Criminal Committee, to which we have referred, has carried with it great weight and authority. Some remarks, however, impeaching its value and importance, have been made. It is not our purpose to vindicate the Report; but we cannot avoid saying, that, with regard to the witnesses examined, we can imagine no fitter persons for the committee to seek information from, than some of the persons whose evidence they have published. Sir W. D. Evans, whose evidence occupies great space, had been for five years a stipendiary magistrate in Manchester, and had long turned his mind to the consideration of the subject under review. Mr. Montague's knowledge and long attention to it, entitles his opinions also to the greatest consideration. We need not particularize other names. The Committee have been blamed because they did not look out for persons hostile to the proposed mitigation: this censure has been urged chiefly with reference to one object of the labours of the Committee, the state of the public mind as to criminal law. But we entirely misapprehend that object, if it be not completely accomplished by the exhibition of evidence, which places beyond doubt, that, at least, a considerable and respectable portion of the community desire the alterations in contemplation; in our view of the subject, it is not necessary, in order to entitle the circumstance to the consideration of the legislature, that the indisposition to prosecute offenders to death, should be shown to be universal, or even general. To collect the opinions of the nation upon the subject, and to strike the balance between them, it would have been preposterous for the Committee to attempt. The Committee have been also blamed for not examining the judges the reason assigned by them, seems to us, a just one. They apprehended it would be indelicate to ask their sentiments upon laws which they were called on to administer. Of the retired judges, Lord Erskine expressed his concurrence in the views of the Committee; Sir William Grant and Sir V. Gibbs found it inconvenient to attend; and Sir James Mansfield and Sir Allan Chambre declined. We cannot conceive a more proper and reasonable description of the sort of witnesses they looked for, than is given by the Committee in page nine of their Report. "Your Committee have sought for evidence from those classes of men who are sufferers from larceny; who are witnesses, jurors, clerks, magistrates, and gaolers," &c. &c. In the outset of this paper, we noticed the appearance of Mr. Bigge's First Report as to New South Wales; a second is to follow and we may indulge the hope, that eventually our system of transportation will be modified as it ought. We will only, for the present, remark, that this species of punishment, under proper regulations, seems to us more eligible, and generally applicable, than, from some loose calculations and remarks which have been presented to the public, might be supposed. As to the subject of imprisonment, we may hereafter offer some observations. We would only now remark, that we should, with regard to imprisonment, look with more confidence to the result of measures of prevention, than of reformation. In the next session of Parliament, the House will be called upon to carry into effect its resolution, as to the mitigation of the criminal law, adopted in the course of the session just closed; and it is therefore important that, in the interval, the public mind should be directed to it, so that the measures which will be proposed for the adoption of the legislature, should experience that support to which they may be entitled. At the present critical period, we should therefore hope, that this paper will be acceptable to our readers. LONDON DISPUTATIONS, No. II. INFLUENCE OF THE STAGE. THE PRESIDENT. As we happen, gentlemen, to have time upon our hands, we may return to the subject of our former conversation. The influence of the stage was then considered, with reference to the intrinsic nature of tragedy and comedy; the principles on which both have been composed; and the character of existing plays. The historical argument remains, together with the conclusions, which present experience may supply. We must now turn our attention to the annals of the theatre, and the acted, rather than the written, drama. I suppose, Clericus and Urbanus, you are alike inclined to take the same side of the question, as before? Most assuredly I am. CLERICUS. URBANUS. And, for my part, I am still disposed to be the advocate of the drama. CLERICUS. There To begin, then, with the historical question. would be few things more interesting and instructive, than a philosophical history of the stage. If it were compiled with sound judgment and strict impartiality, it would open many of the sources, from which popular habits and opinions have been derived; and contribute something to forward the philosophy of mind. It would afford abundant data for the speculations of the moralist, the metaphysician, and the legislator. But this would be a work of long and patient investigation. I must content myself with stating a few particulars with regard to the most distinguished nations. Yet they will, I fear, be amply sufficient to demonstrate, that the influence of the stage, in all the places where it has been established, and during all the periods when it has flourished, has been practically detrimental to the interests of morality, and the happiness of nations. URBANUS. You talk largely; but I am not to be alarmed by these general assertions. What are your instances? CLERICUS. The question might be argued both positively and comparatively. It might be proved, first, that the effects of theatrical representations have been injurious, in se, to every people which has encouraged them: and, secondly, that if we contrast the nations that have been much addicted to dramatic exhibitions, with those that have been unacquainted with them, the preponderance of profligacy, and disorder, and debauchery, has been lamentably on the side of the former; the balance of sobriety and decency, virtuous principle and virtuous conduct, as decidedly in favour of the latter. The theatre was one of the chief instruments in causing the decline of Athenian greatness, and the destruction of Athenian liberty. The dramatists of Athens destroyed the very stamina of the national character, by flattering the popular prejudices, and adding fuel to the popular vanity. They taught the Athenians to neglect, in their fondness for the stage, their occupations and their families, their duties as men and citizens. They well justified the wise foresight of Solon, who beheld the first exhibitions of Thespis with melancholy apprehensions for the ruin of his country. Yet even he, in the midst of his sad anticipations, could hardly anticipate the time, when the very revenues of the republic, the sinews of war, would be turned from the defence and protection of the soil, into the channel of idle amusements and dramatic spectacles. Who, too, can compare the Spartan gravity and decorum with the Athenian immorality and licentiousness, without being convinced, that the theatre of the Athenians was one, at least, among the springs, from which a contrast originated so unfavourable to themselves? URARNUS. The whole institutions of the two states were so different, the spirit and essence of their laws were so dissimilar, that no comparison between them can be safely and accurately drawn, by merely taking into the account any single particular distinction. For myself, I would take the liberty of saying, that Sparta may be an excellent theme for a school-boy's declamation, but that I should have preferred even the Athenian licentiousness, the Athenian ostracism, the Athenian anarchy, to what was, in fact, the more rigid gloom, rather than the stricter virtue, of her rival. Sparta may be very well to praise; but it must have been a wretched place to live in. And as for decency, I can really conceive no theatrical representations on the Athenian stage more censurable on that score than the naked exhibitions of the Spartan virgins. You say, that the Athenian dramatists destroyed the stamina of the Athenian character, by flattering the vanity and indulging the prejudices of the people. But did Aristophanes flatter their vanity and indulge their prejudices? Could Eschylus teach them effeminacy? Could the austere and solemn strains of Sophocles inculcate licentiousness and debauchery? Or was Euripides an instructor in immorality? Plutarch, indeed, talks of the benefits which Athens had received from Miltiades, Themistocles, and Cimon; and asks how Eschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides had shielded her from impending calamities, or increased her military glory? He might as well have demanded how Miltiades, Themistocles, and Cimon had rendered her celebrated for refinement, and augmented her literary fame! Athens, however, is not a fair example of the influence of the drama. For, with regard to the extinction |