The Sun. — 1847-01-06 (London, England)

HUME, M.P., boldly gives his hearers to understand that, compared with other countries in Europe, England stands alone" in regard to punishment by death. This is a serious mis-statement ; for though we would not allude to Russia, yet, in France, certainly a highly civilised nation, judicial power over the life of man is not abandoned. A good cause is never strengthened, but always weakened, when, from negligence, it must be presumed, rather than ignorance, such hap-hazard and groundless assertions are fearlessly made. We are sorry to perceive these gentlemen constantly adverting to Scripture in furtherance of the cause they espouse, and, not only so, but that they indulge this propensity with greater freedom than judgment. We think they would do well to abandon the idea of enforcing their views through the medium of Holy Writ. In the first place, they only seem unnecessarily to involve the question in greater intricacy ; and, in the next, it is always painful when they so marshall their reasonings, upon what they consider emanates from this sacred source, as to educe mani fest contradictions. We are grieved by an unhappy example of this nature, as elucidated by what transpired last evening. Assuming the correcteritranslation of the oft-quoted passage to be that the words " by man" should be omitted, it would then run thus :  —" Whoso sheddeth man's blood, shall his blood be  shed," which does not remove the difficulty, for blood is still to be shed. Then, if not by man, by whom is it to be ? Not by Divine Power, according to the abolitionists, for they quote again from one of the Prophets, " As I live saiththe LORD, I will not the death of a sinner, but that he be converted and live." So that, on the one hand, we are directly told in the Bible that blood shall be shed, and, indirectly, by those who desire to get rid of capital punishment, that blood shall not be shed. We hope we have said enough to lead to our being spared from a repetition of these unhappy allusions to Scripture. Nothing could be more infelicitous than the train of reasoning in which the Rev. Dr. CARLISLE indulged, founded upon his references to other portions of the sacred writings. This could be easily demonstrated ; but we decline the ungrateful task lest we should seem to be infringing upon the advice we have just sincerely tendered. Besides, the question can be well enough handled without  1 leaning upon doubtful interpretations of particular passages in the Bible; for the whole matter in issue turns upon the point, whether human life is, or is not, best protected by the existence of punishment by death; and which ever way it be determined, so that the best security he realised for the preservation of life against the machinations and assaults of the murderer, we may feel assured that the human law is in keeping with the divine. To decide this question, we must be chiefly guided by our own experience, and that of other civilised countries whose social condition is analogous to the condition of Great Britain. But experience alone is not sufficient; it, must be united with the utmost caution and the most reflective judgment; for, after all, what a dangerous