Page images
PDF
EPUB

sacre, had been his desire. In answer to a question from the sheriffs, they said they would not confess any thing. The executioner then proceeded to affix the ropes. In tying the knot upon John, he pressed it rather tightly; upon which he turned about angrily, and said, "You rascal, hate you a mind to strangle me?" but suddenly recollecting himself, he seemed to take no further notice. They were then conducted from the inner part of the gaol to the platform outside. The ropes were adjusted in the pullies, and the board being withdrawn, they were instantly suspended. Editor.

High treason is an offence committed against the security of the commonwealth, or of the king, it's representative. It is considered as parricide, and therefore ought not to be extended to offences which bear no analogy to that crime. In making it high treason to commit a theft in any house belonging to the state, or even to speak seditious words, you lessen the horror which the crime of high treason ought to inspire.

In our ideas of great crimes there should be nothing arbitrary. If a theft from, or imprecation against, a father be considered as parricide, you break the bond of filial piety: the son will then regard his parent as a terrible monster. Every exaggeration in a law tends to it's destruction.

In common crimes, the laws of England are favourable to the accused; but in cases of high treason they are against him. The jesuit Titus Oates being legally interrogated in the house of commons, and having, upon his oath, declared that he had related the whole truth, yet afterwards accused the secretary of the Duke of York, and several others, of high treason, and his information was admitted. He likewise swore before the king's council, that

he

he had not seen the secretary, and afterwards that he had. Notwithstanding these illegalities and contradictions, the secretary was executed,

The same Titus Oates and another witness deposed, that fifty jesuits had conspired to assassinate Charles II, and that they had seen commissions, signed by Father Oliva, general of the jesuits, for the officers that were to command an army of rebels. This evidence was sufficient to authorize the tearing out the hearts of several people, and dashing them in their faces. But, seriously, can two witnesses be thought sufficient to convict a man whom they have a mind to destroy? At least, one would ima gine they ought not to be notorious villains; neither ought that which they depose to be impro. bable.

Let us suppose that two of the most upright magistrates in the kingdom were to accuse a man of having conspired with the mufti to circumcise the whole council of state, the parliament, the archbishop, and the sorbonne. In vain these two magistrates might swear that they had seen the letters of the mufti; it would naturally be supposed that they were wrong in their heads. it was equally ridiculous to imagine that the general of the jesuits should raise an army in England as that the mufti intended to circumcise the court of France. But, unhappily, Titus Oates was believed, that there might remain no species of atrocious folly which hath not entered into the heart of man.

:

The laws of England do not consider as guilty of conspiracy those who are privy to it, and do not inform they suppose the informer as infamous as the conspirator is culpable. In France, if any one be privy to a conspiracy, and does not reveal it, he is punished with death. Lewis XI, against whom

[blocks in formation]

spiracies were frequent, made this law; a law which a Lewis XII or a Henry IV could never have imagined. It not only obliges an honest man to divulge a crime which, by his resolution and advice, he might possibly prevent, but it renders him liable to be punished as a calumniator, it being easy for the accused to manage their affairs in such a manner as to elude conviction.

This was exactly the case of the truly respectable Augustin de Thou, counsellor of state, and son of the only good historian of which France can boast, equal to Guiccardini in point of abilities, and perhaps superior in point of impartiality.

This conspiracy was against Cardinal de Richelieu, rather than against Lewis XIII. The design was not to betray France to any enemy; for the king's brother, who was the principal author of the plot, could never intend to betray a kingdom to which he was the presumptive heir, there being only between him and the crown a dying brother and two children in the cradle.

De Thou was neither guilty in the sight of God nor man. One of the agents of the king's brother, of the Duke de Bouillon, sovereign Prince of Sedan, and of the grand equerry d'Effiat St. Mars, had communicated their intention to De Thou, who immediately went to St. Mars, and endeavoured to dissuade him from the enterprise. If he had informed against him, he had no proof, and must inevitably have fallen a sacrifice to the resentment of the presumptive heir, of a sovereign prince, of the king's favourite, and to public execration. In short, he would have been punished as a malignant calumniator.

The chancellor Seguier was convinced of this in confronting De Thou with the grand equerry;

when

when De Thou asked the latter the following question : "Do you not remember, Sir, that there never passed a day in which I did not endeavour to dissuade you from the attempt?"-St. Mars acknowledged it to be true; so that De Thou deserved a recompence, rather than death, from a tribunal of equity. He certainly deserved to have been saved by Cardinal Richelieu; but humanity was not his virtue. There is in this case something more than "Summum jus, summa injuria." In the sentence of this worthy man, we read, "for having had knowledge and participation of the said conspiracy." It does not say-for not having re vealed so that his crime was his having been in formed of a crime; and he was punished for having had ears and eyes.

All that we can say in extenuation of this severity is, that it was not the act of justice herself, but of a delegated power. The letter of the law was positive; but I appeal, not only to the lawyers, but to all mankind, whether the spirit of the law was not perverted? It is a melancholy absurdity, that a small number of people should condemn as criminal a man judged innocent by a whole nation, and worthy their esteem! Voltaire.

TREASON, PETTY.

This is described by the statute of the 25th of Edward the Third to be the offence of a servant killing his master, a wife killing her husband, or a secular or religious slaying his prelate. The pu nishment is somewhat more ignominious than in other capital offences, inasmuch as a hurdle is used instead of a cart. Here again occurs a very strong instance of the inequality of punishments; for al

2 M 3

though

though the principle and essence of this crime is breach of duty and obedience due to a superior slain, yet if a child murder his parents, unless he serve them for wages, he is not within the statute; although it must seem evident to the meanest understanding that parricide is certainly a more atrocious and aggravated offence than either of those specified in the statute. Colquhoun.

TRIALS.

There are five inferior courts of justice, where small offences, committed in London and it's vicinity, are tried by justices of the peace: viz.

1. The general and quarter sessions of the peace, held eight times a year, by the lord mayor and aldermen, at Guildhall, for the trial of small offences committed in London.

2. The quarter sessions of the peace, held four times a year at Guildhall, Westminster, by the justices acting for that city and liberty, for the trial of small offences committed in Wesminster only.

3. The general and quarter sessions of the peace, held eight times a year, at the New Sessions House on Clerkenwell-Green (commonly called Hicks's Hall), by the justices only of the county of Middlesex, for the trial of small offences committéd in Middlesex and Westminster.

4. The general quarter sessions of the peace, held in the Sessions House in Well-Close-Square, by the justices for the liberty of the Tower of Lon. don, for the trial of small offences committed within the Royalty.

5. The quarter sessions of the peace, held by the justices for the county of Surry, at the New Sessions House at Newington, Surry, in January; at

Reigate

« PreviousContinue »