The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-06-21 00:00:00

every maritime town

port, with respect to the manufacturing districts and
Ireland, renders the exercise of a large discretion by
the board of guardians unavoidable. Undoubtedly
this discretion will be allowed ultimately by the com-
missioners ; and any disbursements made in the exer-
cise of it, although in strictness irregular, will be duly
passed. But, if this be the case, of what use is the
New Poor Law ? If it can only be tolerated here when

its provisions are evaded, why attempt its introduction ?
It has worked well, they say, in large towns. When ?
Where ? Precisely when and where the attempt has not
been made to enforce it at all ! And in Liverpool we
venture to prophecy that it never can and never will
be worked.

We call then, and we call earnestly, upon parliament
to confine the operation of the law to those localities
where the abuses which it was designed to correct have
existed. Unquestionably such was the original inten-
tion of the legislatnre, for it is only by an unworthy
quibbling sidewind that towns, having local acts for the
management of their poor, have been brought under the
authority of the commissioners. It has been only by
the incorporation of such towns into unions with
suburban districts that the commissioners have been
able to oust the jurisdiction of the legally constituted
authorities ; and if, as it is confessedly the case, they
have not, in practice, been able to improve upon the
existing system in such towns,—if, as we believe it to
be the case, their interference is only the source of dif-
ficulty and annoyance,—we do maintain that it would
only be honest and just, as well as politic, to waive
that power, which they have only acquired by fraud,
(until this bill legalizes their enjoyment of it,) and which
they cannot exercise with advantage.

So far as Liverpool is concerned, we have no doubt
that an able and determined stand will he made by our
excellent representatives, and that we shall at length
be relieved from the pressure of a system whose intro•
duction here is alike uncalled for and injurious. The
poor of this town have ever been well cared for, and
the interests of the ratepayers have also been honestly
protected. Why saddle us, then, with this obnoxious
system, when the moral certainty is before the eyes of
the legislature that it cannot add one jot to the well
being of any class in our community ?

In another place w•e have inserted some remarks
from a valued contemporary, the Morning Herald,
upon the sentence-passed upon the unhappy criminal,
John Francis. We do not yield, even to our contem-

porary, in our aversion to the sanguinary punishment
prescribed for offences of the highest dye by the crimi-
nal law of Great Britain. Conducted, as it has re-
cently been, the punishment of death, with the accom-
panying theatrical exhibition of the condemned sermon,
and the mawkish sentimentalities which are excited by

it; is more an incentive to crime, in some peculiarly
constructed minds, than a preventive ; and upon no
occasion has a public execution operated as a warning
to any class of offenders. With our contemporary,
however, we would not willingly incur the risk of ex-
ercising a weak lenity in the case of the individual in
question. The crime of which lie has been found guilty
by a jury of his country is one which the executive
cannot and ought not took upon lightly. It is not
only one of blood-guiltiness in intention ; it is not only
the attempted death of an amiable and unofFending fe-
male ; lout it is a crime which, if suffered to be com-
mitted with comparative impunity, strikes at the very
root of the monarchical system under which we live, and
the possible consequences of which to an entire nation
it is almost appalling to contemplate.
It is not to be borne that any miscreant, such as this
Francis, may put in peril the life of the Sovereign, and
possibly change the line of succession to the throne,
and yet receive no more serious punishment than the
man who robs dwelling-house or steals from his neigh-
bour's pocket a five pound note. It is not to be thought
of that every penniless scamp who chooses to earn a
life of ease and comparative luxury, although in Bed-
lam, should be permitted to single out majesty as the
instrument with which he works. Confer the same
immunity which has attended the attempt of Oxford
upon this man—put him in the way of becoming the
object of sympathy to sentimental ladies and silly men—
shut him up in a lunatic asylum—(and he is, perhaps,
quite as fit for it as the other withworthy)--supply
supP•J
tracts and novels ; give him the same never-ending

' notoriety--and it might as well be proclaimed that the
Sovereign of Great Britain may be shot at for a shill-
ing a time, and a peerage and a pension to the man
who hits his mark. ' The class to which these fellows
belong must be taught that the Soverign is not a mere
abstract idea—that her life is not a mere worthless
thing to be perilled at their pleasure ; that the crime
of murder, because committed upon har person, is not
to be put upon a par with that committed by a starv-
ing wretch who breaks a window to find admission to
the precincts of a county gaol ; and the only way to con-
vey this lesson effectually is to let the law take its
course upon the first offender.

Whilst expressing this opinion, however, we are far
from tolerating the carrying out of the entire sentence,
as pronounced upon this unhappy man. Let him die
a felon's and a traitor's death; but spare us the enor-
mity of the mutilation which forms a portion of his
punishment. To be drawn to the place of execution
and there hung, is sufficient ; and the public will rea-
dily dispense with the subsequent disposal of his body,
as prescribed by the strict letter of his sentence.