The Sun. — 1828-12-08 (London, England)

FROM THE NEWS.)  The public attention has been for some time painfully drawn, particularly- by the cases of the Rev. Mr. Fenn and Joseph Hunton, towards the subject of the frequency of our capital punishments for the crime of forgery. We had occasion to remark, in a recent number, that " the temptation to crime is increased with the apparent impunity, and Me greater the temptation the less the moral guilt." Now, if such are truisms,--and we believe all will admit them to be,—why punishforgery as you punish murder. The only excuse for this-twerinal.severity we ever heard worthy of being listened to, is that ive live in a commercial country, and that it is necessary far the carrying on of trade to fence round our paper circulation with the bloody edicts ialich are now being so frequently appealed to for its protection. Even admitting this argument, the Christian and the i♦loralist must allow that we are adapting our laws more to expediency than to the great principles of equity, which are co-eternal with truth. But we are far from admitting the correctness of the ' argument, that such severity is absolutely :necessary. It is exercised in no other country than England, although it is well known that in France and Holland,- and many parts of Germany, a large portion of the commerce is carried on through the medium of a paper circulation. And yet we hear of nothing like the frequency of the crime of forgery in those countries that we experience here. We therefore contend, that instead of going on hanging as we barbarously do, every Sessions (and which after all, is found ineffectual as a remedy) it would he as well if we made a trial of the more huMane mode of transportation, under. peculiar circumstances of priiTation. The life of a fellow creature is too precious to be risked where there exists any doubt as to the expediency of its sacrifice. " To wrest from God's own hand the sword of justice, And be your own avengers."  The numerous interviews which the Duke of Wellington has lately had with the Archbishop of Canterbury, have-given strength to the reports that in the ensuing Session something will be attempted to allay the furor which now attends the question of Catholic Emancipation. Whether that son►ethin; will content the Irish Catholics, we entertain considerable doubts. For our parts we must say, that if a concession is to be made, it should he of that nature as to be acceptable to those on whorls the favour is intended to operate—else why make the concession. We will riot, however, anticipate objections before we know the facts. Humour says that the Duke intends to bring forward a qualified plan of Emancipation—and if that is not acceded to by the Irish Catholics, and if they still persist in their present system of agitation,he will then suspend the Habeas Corpus Ad, and by force put down the Association and the collection of the rent. Ile is unable, such is the present state of the law, to effect either of these measures without suspending the Habeas Corpus. This is, however, a dangermis step for any Prime Minister to take—the more especially, as it would absolutely do nothing towards permanently qaieting Lela►nd. The game of agitation would recommence with additional fury the instant. the despotic pressure of power was relaxed—and the intervention of a war, in which England were a principal, might prove the means of separating the two countries for ever.