The National Register. — 1819-02-08 (London, England)

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1819.  in exciting popular  for the sufferer, and  horror of the bloody law to which he falls a victim. Now admitting Dr Paley's principles, it appears, that his very object—example—is defeated by punishing a man for stealing a sheep, in the same fate as if he had murdered a fellow creature. The Doe tor's justification, therefore, in this respect, of the infliction of death by the law of England on so many minor offences. falls short of its object. Ile advances, however, another defence, namely, that death, though denounced against so many crimes, is inflicted on only a few criminals. This he says, is systematically the intention of the law of England. 'lt is founded on the consideration, that • the selection of proper objects for capital punishment principally depends upon circumstances ; which how' ever easy to perceive, in each particular case, after ' the crime is committed, it is impos►ible to enumerate ' or define before hand, or to ascertain, however, will • that exactness, which is requisite in legal descriptions. ' Hence, although it be necessary to fix by precise rules of law the baundary on one site, that is, the limit to which the punishment may be extended; and also, that nothing less than the authority of the whole legislature be suffered to determine that boundary, and assign these rules ; yet the mitigation of punish' ment the exercise of lenity, may without danger be entrusted to the execative magistrate, whose discretion will operate upon those numerous, unforeseen, mutable, and indefinite circumstances both of the crime and the criminal, whit i constitute or quality the malignity of each offence. Without the power of relaxation lodged in a Aving authority, either some offenders would escape capital punishment, whom the public safety required to suffer, or some ' would undergo this punishment, where it was ' neither deserved nor necessary. For if judgment of death were reserved for one or two species of crime  only (which xvould probably be the case, if that pu nishment Wai intended to be executed without exec'," tion), crimes might occur of the most dangerous ex' ample, and accompanied with circumstances of heinous • aggravation, which did nut fall within any description of offences teLich the laws had made capital, and which consequently could not receive the punishment their own ntalignity and the public safety required.' ' The law of England,' he contiqdes, is constructed upon a different and better policy. By the number of statutes creating capital offences, it sweeps into • the net every crime, which under every possible cit.' cumstance, may merit the punishment of death ; but when the execution of this sentence comes to be de. libetatcd upon, a small proportion of each class are singled out, the general character, or the peculiar nggravations of whose crimes, render them fit examples of public justice. By this expedient few ectually suf. fee death, whilst the dread and danger of it hang over the crimes of many.'  Now, admiting the full force of this argument, what would it prove? Much more than Doctor Paley intended, viz. that arbitrary power, discreetly administered, is better than a system of law ; because as the varieties of the degrees of guilt of diticreut culprits arc infinite, w no previous denunciations of the law can fit them exactly, bat only the cliseretion of the judges, when all these drcumstances are known. Now admit tine this argument, it could only hold true were there but one jade, and were he gifted with the keenest insight into characters and motives. But there are twelve judges, who go the circuits, and we have no right to expect that they should be all so gifted. The discretion of one judge is very diffe'cnt from that of another ; and must be so. Imputing to all, as they well deserve, much knowledr, the highest integrity, and the best intentions. vet from wagons causes of hibit, tempera's:teak, stu..l'.es) aud Ilirfercuee of experieuee, some