The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-01-22 00:00:00

THE LONDON PRESS.

ON CAPITAL PUNISHMENTS.

Without going into the extent of certain opinions upon
the subject of the punishment of death, when fairly ad-
vanced, we are disposed to pay a calm and respectful at-
tention to the arguments by which they are supported.
It sometimes, however, happens that the eagerness of
humane persons to establish their views leads to a species
of reasoning both fallacious and untenable. For instance,
the unfortunate conviction of an innocent person has no
necessary connexion with the propriety of the penalty
awarded for the crime. A false conviction, be the
penalty what it may, is an affair of error or blame upon
quite a diff.!rent principle, and we know not what is to
distinguish the erroneous conviction of an innocent man
for murder (more likely, by the way, to occur than for
way ( t ter crime) from that of a similar mistake as to a
petty larceny. That in proportion to the weight of the
penalty, the nature of the evidence should be more strictly
canvassed, although a sort of concession as to strict legal
principle we are not disposed to deny; but we totally
object to the.real or supposed errors of juries being made
a criterion by which the extent of a legal penalty ought
to be regulated. We have been led into these observa-
tions by some ingenious attempts in the Brighton
Guardian and other apers to confound these distinc-
tions in the case of CTeorge Webb, lately executed in
Sussex for that species of arson which has prevailed to so
injurious an extent for the last year or two in the agri-
cultural districts. All sorts of efforts are made to show

that the jury should not have convicted him—why, be-
cause he was innocent ? No, but because the punish-
ment was death. Need we point out the fallacy of this
logic, and to what absurdities it would conduct? The
_Brighton Guardian calls the evidence very slight upon
which this poor wretch was convicted ; if so, the imputa-
tion is not against the law, but the jury, who are very
poorly vindicated by saying, that had they supposed the
extreme penalty would have been levied, they would
have acquitted him. As reasoning, indeed, all this is
intolerable ; although preferable to the apology for ma-
lignant arson as a mere crime against property. We
hesitate not to say, that we deem it one of the most in-
excusable and atrocious of all crime, because it is one for
which the natural reason of the most stupid of mankind
can form no moral excuse. A little study of the preva-
lence of this class of notions among the Irish peasantry,
and the consequences ought to convince every reflective
person of theGveakness of extending mercy to delinquents
of a similar description. The loss of the single barn or
haystack may be a trifle, but the burning of barns and
hayitacks as a prevalent custom, even the logicians who
call forth these remarks must deem an evil. which calls

for the most severe and direct repression. We know no-
thing of the case of George Webb, but that a respectable
jury found him guilty of arson, and nothing to impeach
their verdict but a simple possibility of innocence has yet
been stated. This may be an argument against circum-
stantial evidence, but not against death for arson. Go-
vernment in the denial of mercy could have no other
guide but the verdict of a competent jury, and a convic-
tion of. the absolute necessity of acting with all legal se-
verity towards crimes at once so inexcusable in motive,
and abounding with so many afflictive consequences, not
only to property but to the character, habits, and asso-
ciations of the labouring agricultural population of the
country. To conclude, let us attend to every reasonable
argument against the punishment of death which is pre-
sented to us, but let them not be formed upon factitious
inferences and false analogies. George Webb has been
executed, had he not been executed an additional score
Of barns, &c. might have been burned, and as many in-
cendiaries transported for life ; all which are serious con-
siderations, and to be taken into account.—Globe.

THE MINISTERIAL PLAN OF CHURCH REFORM.
A thousand rumours circulate about some scheme of

church reform, said to be agreed to by certain of the pre-
lates. Nothing, however, snaking any approach to an
authentic character has transpired, and we, therefore,
shall not assume, even for argument sake, the probability
that any of the atrocious schemes of spoliation and of de-
gradation to religion itself; which the majority of the ru-
mours surmise, can be seriously contemplated. On the
other side, we are bound to say, that some reports—
though, indeed, much the fewer number—speak of an
arrangement which will deserve the support of the con-
servative party in the country, as it proceeds from the
conservative party in the cabinet. Let us hope the best,
but let us not trust too far. Meanwhile, we cannot help
thinking that the modern system of secrecy upon great
and fundamental questions until the moment in which
men are summoned to give a peremptory opinion, is
highly irrational, and altogether unsuited to the genius
of a free government. It is very plain, that this carry-
ing forward public business by improvisation as it were
on one side, and surprise on the other, cannot permit a
deliberate judgment even upon the most abstract propo-
sition, much less allow of that inquiry into details, that
consultation of practical persons, and that calm collection
of public opinion in a calm state, all of which is not more
than what is necessary to form a just estimate of the pro-
priety of adopting any great public measure. It will,
perhaps, be said, that the several stages through which
a bill must pass in Parliament afford ample time for the
most mature consideration. This we wholly deny: every
measure of importance is either virtually carried or de-
feated on the first reading, that is, to reject cant and de-
lusion, without any consideration or inquiry at all in the
country, and with merely a mockery of both in Parlia-
ment. If no decision was to be come to until after a bill
had been discussed in its three several stages, that is, if
the threefold discussion were matter of course, there
would be some pretence that a measure was fairly can-
vassed in the House of Commons, as far as the discussion
of an abstract proposition, but no farther. At present,
when secrecy is observed up to the promulgation of a law,
as in the cases of the Roman Catholic bill and reform
bill, however the people may feel on.the one side or the
other, they may assure themselves that they have had nu-
tting to do in the business, and that the parliamentary
exhibition is, on the ministerial side, a mere farce, the
representation of an intrigue previously well rehearsed
in secret. The system of secrecy with respect to pro-
posed measures had its origin, we believe, in those ques-
tions of trade and taxation in which a law, if known be-
forehand, might be evaded beforehand. Now, besides
that "necessaas ex•cusat legem," in this case, whereas
there is no just necessity whatever in the case of a great
constitutional change, laws of trade and taxation operate
but partially, and if they inflict a wrong it is a wrong
which can be repaired without difficulty, and they can
have no analogy to such momentous and irrevocable mea-
sures as those to which we have been alluding. Such,
surely, ought not to be adopted, without giving the pub-
he full time for careful, we will say for nanute and even
jealous investigation. In claiming for ourselves and fel-
low-subjects this right, we are not aware that we are pro-
moting the peculiar interest of any party, except it be
the parties of truth, freedom, and popular right; and
conservatives, ministerialists, and radicals, will all claim
to.belong to these parties, though we have recent proof
that both conservatives and ministerialists [the radicals
nominalim have not been in power) can violate, as we
Think very improperly, the right of deliberate examine-
ticn for which we contend. 11V e propose nothing so wild
as a sudden change of the present mode of proceedings
in Parliament : they may be very well c,ontinued, if only
Ile system of mystery and surprise be abandoned, and if
s:,e responsible ministers of the crown will only show so