The Sun.
London, England, 1832-02-03 00:00:00

own solemn declaration or innocentt
know me in Heaeb foi. a ini.irdered man !" If
there were no other objection to capital punish-
ments, there would be this powerful one—that
while human judgment is fabible—that while
human testimony is liable to the distortions of
error, or the falsifications of malice, cupidity,
and revenge---human ttibunals are liable to con-
sign innocence to the doom intended for guilt
alone ; and, where the punishment is death, the
error is irreparable. Our readers are aware that
petition, signed by twenty-five thousand inha-
bitants of Nottingham and its vicinity, praying,
upon cogent arguments, the mercy of the Crown
towards the five rioters, was laid before his iNla-
jesty ; and it now appears his Royal Highness
the Duke of Sussex presented that petition
himself, and made a personal intercession for
their lives. This conduct was such as might
be expected of the Royal Duke, whose enlight-
ened anxiety for the substantial amelioration of
the Criminal Law was evinced last year by pre-
senting to the House of Lords the " London
Jurors' Petition," praying for the abolition of
the punishment of death in all cases of crime for
offences against the rights of property. On that
occasion, it will he recollected, his Royal High-
ness delivered a speech in support of the peti-
tion, which was distinguished for sound and ju-
dicious views of the principles of criminal
jurisprudence. Our readers will also recol-
lect, that a second petition in favour of the
extension of mercy to the Nottingham rioters
was presented to the House of Commons a few
evenings ago, which petition was signed in twelve
hours by 17,000 persons ;—yet mercy was re-
fused to the three unfortunate men, under the
circumstances which we have stated, though we
think the guiltiest among them had a stronger
claim to prefer for a commutation of punishment
than the convicted Burkite whom Lord Mel-
bourne so recently recommended to the Royal
mercy. The humanity of the King's heart is
well known, but he was bound to act upon the
counsel of his constitutional advisers ; and their
counsel was to carry the law of extermination
into force. Why were the Ministers of the
Crown adverse to the exercise of the prerogative
of mercy towards those infatuated victims of the
" Reform excitement ?" A writer in a Minis.
terial Paper, as devotedly attached to the present
Administration as to the one which preceded it,
attempts to account for the exorable adherence
to the sentence of blood. He says :

" All has not been effected that could have been wished
(as to mercy), but, more, perhaps, could not have been
expected from an Administration which has more than
once been taunted in Parliament with not affording due
protection to the persons and properties of their political
opponents. Let it be recollected that those Tory taunte,
which h we been repeated over and over a,2ain in the Tory
Press, may have stood in the way of a mote humane and
lenient administration of the law by a Whig Government."
Now the fact is the Tory Press itself had
joined in the intercessions for mercy to those
men ; but, supposing the writer's explanation
correct, then it would follow that Whig Minis-
ters hanged men, not because they considered
it l light to hang them, but because they were
taunted by their political rivals, and so offered
human sacrifices upon the altar of political ex-
pediency ! Surely no censure of an enemy can
be more severe than this apology of a devoted
friend. We hope a Whig Ministry have some
better salve for their consciences than it is pos-
sible to extract from the morality of such a doc-
trine as is here laid down ; if not, their con-
sciences must be easily satisfied, when their de-
cision involves the awful question of human
lie !—Morning Herald.

In the Times of Wednesday last we explained
the manoeuvres of the Charles street party, as
exhibited in both Houses on Thursday, the
26th ult. The concealment of their strength in
the Peers, and their demonstration of it in the
Commons, had the same identical object, viz.—
to dissuade the Sovereign from the creation of
Peers, by showing his Majesty Ministers
were strong enough in the Upper House to dis-
pense with such an exercise of the prerogative,
and so weak in the Lower House, that should
there be a change of Administration there was
no risk of the Anti-Reform faction being unable
to carry on the Government. This we described
to be the double tactique of the night in
question ; and, with regard to the minority in
the Peers, our view of the subject receives a
confirmation from a quarter whence we had
hardly expected,—we mean the Dublin Even-
ing Mail, the organ of Orangemen in Ire-
land, and of those Irish Lords and Commoners
who may be considered the most extreme
ultras among the Anti-Reformers of the Impe-
rial Parliament. The words of the Mail evi-
dently caught as they fell from the lips of its
patrons, are these :—After stating the numbers
of Opposition Peers to be ninety-nine in support
of the motion of Lord Aberdeen, the candid
partisan goes on to say, that " the Opposition
which voted in the majority against the Reform
Bill amounted to 199 ; therefore Mt friends
omitted to vote against Government the other
night, which we may venture to say was inten-
tional and pre-arranged, inasmuch as it was an
object not to give Lord Grey an excuse with the
King for the creation of new Peers, and also
because it would be unwise to acquaint Govern-
ment with the exact strength of the Opposition !"
Yea, these are the very words,—for which, we
doubt not, the vain simpleton who indicted
them will get a rap over the knuckles from his
masters. But now let us put one plain ques-
tion to Ministers. If it be the avowed and
never-changing purpose of the Opposition to pre-
vent the creation of Peers, as a measure fatal to
their prospects of quashing Reform and expelling
Lord Grey's Cabinet from office, what, in the
name of common sense, can be so clear as that,
on the admission of the Anti-Reformers them-
selves, the most effectual way to preserve the
Cabinet, and to pass the Bill, is through that
same exercise of the prerogative so furiously
railed against, or cunningly resisted by the Op-
salon It can never be too often repeated, that
the close run in the House of Commons has
altered in a great degree the character of the
whole question. So long as the people out of
doors were satisfied with the overwhelming ma-
jority with which Ministers had hitherto met the
attempts of the Anti-Reform junta, there always
existed a strong reserve of public confidence and
animation to fall back upon, and Ministers might
feel themselves at liberty to tune their measures
for counteracting the toe, as they thought fit.
That is the case no longer. The Anti-Reform
faction have raised a hue and cry by which they
hope to overwhelm the Government at once,
through the effect upon the popular mind of posi-
tive and impudent, but pertinacious and reiterated,
falsehoods. They have asserted, they do assert,
that the King will not sanction the means which
his Ministers have urgently recommended to him
for securing the success of the Bill. No matter
whether this be true or false, the want of con-
tradiction gives it the force of truth ; the Mi-
nisters are hourly weakened by it, and the mis-
chief may, by further delay, become irreparable.