The Express.
London, England, 1859-11-14 00:00:00

LCINPON, MONDAY, NOV. 14.

Tut numerous statements, counter-statements, ex-
planations and corrections concerning the resolution
which the Government has formed in the case of Dr.
SYETIII'asT, which have appeared within the last
few day., are indirect but strong proofs of the
anomalous position in which the Executive Govan-
meat is placed with refereoce to convicted prisoners
whose 'silt is thought to admit of doubt. According
to the latest gleam official exposition of the course of
the Government, the Hone Secarrane found it im-
possible to resist the man of medical evidence
throwing doubt: upon the prisoner's guilt—"them
doubts being more of a legal than a moral can-
" meter." Thus the law could not be allowed
to take its course, and the SLCILICTaIT Of STATI, 0b
cording to this authority, saw se way of dialing
with the conviction but by granting a free pardon.
We cannot doubt that this ie a true statement.
Either the conviction is good enough to justify the
execution of the prisoner, or it is insufficwot to war-
rant hie detention. The commutation of a sentence
founded in error would be altogether absurd and
hurtful to every idea of justice. But for the fact or
belief, then, that 13111ETEIVMST Committed an offence
other than that for which he we tried at the Old
Bailey, he would now be at large. In the intention
of the Government he ix freed from the con-
sequences of the recent conviction, although for tem-
porary and collateral reasons the formal pardon is
delayed. It is now, however, resolved to prosecute
S NI rot cacr for bigamy, he having serried ISASILLIA
IlaNkle Int December, his wife, Ma.iy Bnrinurne,
being still alive. Taking all things into account,
this was probably the beet coarse the Government
mild take. But it is an unusual proceeding, only
one of the ladies being alive, and she little disposed
to harass a man with whom she lived thirty yeah,
and who during that time treated her well. We may
take it for certain that this new prosecution would
not have been commenced ea independent grounds ;
it will therefore corms before the jury, as it now comes
before the country, rather as e expedient for repair-
ing the failure of a much more serious trial, or as a
means of satisfying a public moral feeling, than as
a simple demand of justice on the mere merits of
the case.

Few per,ons will agree that this is a satisfactory
state of things. If Sweewcarre ham been wrongly
found guilty of murder he ought, bigamist though
he may be, to receive some hotter reversal of his
sentence than is conveyed by a "pardon." It is,
moreover, made too probable by experience that
but (or this charge held in reserve, the pardon
now impending would not issue, but that a feeble
compromise, recoecileable neither with the guilt nor
the innocence of the prisoner, would be substituted
for it. This is not the fault of the Government,
except en far es the Government must always be
more or less responsible for the state of the law.
In • free conatry, whenever the guilt of senviets is
uncertain the Executive will neither be bold to
punish nor frank to absolve. We see no way of serape
from this perplexing and demoralising situation
but that which Sir EAP.DLIT WUJIOT so ably ad-
vocated is this journal last September, the esta-
blishment of a supreme judicial tribunal in which
the issue of criminal trials may be reconsidered en
the 'sect of fresh evidence coming to light after the
verdict, or of circumstances generally transpiring
which may render • review of the proceedings de-
sirable. Tue spectacle presented to us in the **-
counts of the last few days of a Home Secretary
struggling with a " Teat mess of evidence," and
" resisting doubts" upon the solution of which a
man's life depends, will not be allowed to recur if
all the bearings of this case are fully considered
by the public and the legislature. Most of the arra-
ments which have been advanced against the institu-
tion of such • court se we have indicated are easily
answered. This te not a court for impairing the
regal prerogative of mercy, but one tormenting that
justice to which the meanest of her MaJtiree's sub-
jects has a right. Neither need we fear that juries
will take less pains to return good verdicts if their
Tlifdieta are made liable to review. That which jury-
ewe and all of as dislike is arbitrariness and anew-

Minty. Juries arediscoaraged when they find that what
they have doe* openly has been undone in secret—
that what they have judged on setabliebed rules and
principles ham been rejudged by an anomalous au-
thority. The prospect of a reasonable and puha.)
revision of their finding will not deter them from
doing their duty. The common feeling and expe-
rience of human natarerather point the other way ;
for men are never so anxious to do their duty to
their fallow•men as when they sin responsible to
others for their conduct and actions.

It haa been objected that a 'sperm judicial tri-
bunal such aa We have ia.liested would he amy
costly institution. But there is se foundation at all
for this few. The expenses of the Cour de Causa-
tion at Parte, w►ich Fergan a. function& similar to,
those of the tribunal we are considering. amount to
less than 10,0001. per annum, a sum which would
amply defray the expenses attending the proposed
department of justice in England, besides those lad-