Star. — 1821-09-13 (London, England)

FROM VIE TIMES.  This, we doubt not, is, on the part of the Jury, a conscientious verdict. The impression which was left upon our own minds by the whole of thesvidence taken together, and mere especially by certain portions of it which were the most positive, uncontradicted, and unsuspicious. might perhaps have induced us, had we been Jurymen, to lean towards a judgment less qualified in the degree of guilt which it ascribed to the destroyers of Honey. nut though, on fair and manly grounds, we dissent from the exact terms of the verdict, we respect the motives by which it was governed ; nor shall we follow the modern example of intimidating Jurors, or vilifying their decisions, when they happen to be at variance with our own. Much as, in our opinion, it would be desirable, that so far as was consistent with the sworn facts of each case, the sense of every tribunal throughout the land, from the Coroner's Inquest to the final array of the Petty Jury, should be declared against the agents of military violence, and should stand in the breach to protect our free Con. stitutiob no humane or reasonable being could entertain such a sentiment from vindictive feelings towards the unfortunate soldiers.  Where the soldier betrays no peculiar and malignant ferocity, but acts, although strictly speaking, in contravention of the law, yet, speaking morally, under the pressure of painft.l and perplexing circumstances, arising of necessity out of the situation in which his superiors have unjustly placed him, a Jury, it is true, may he compelled by their oaths to find such a man guilty of the crime of murder : yet the Ministers who have exposed him to the risk would be unpardonable for suffering him to undrrgo the punishment. Why, then, we shall be asked, call for the trial of a criminal, only that he may escape the gallows? We answer, that it is of inestimable importance that an arbitrary Minister should be forced to screen from punishment a crime which has been perpetrated in obedience to his wenvetters. It would be such an exposure of the red criminal—it would be such a signal condemnation of that kind of Government under which crimes become inevitable, and punishment impossible—that after a very few public instances of subjects shot, and soldiers after convicting' pardoned, little more would be heard of peace-officers in helmets, of constables' staves represented by drawn sabres, er of Magistrates receiving orders from a Captain of the Guards. It is from our constitutional anxiety to see the end of this terrible system, that we are disposed to lean in every case of military violence against the principle from which the violence emanates, though not against the persons (more to be pitied than condemned) who have been its unwilling agents. It is there_ fore that we feel disappointed in some degree, when we find, or think we find, a Jury entrapped by their own moderation and tenderness into a judgment which militates against a great reform in our state policy, but which saves no culprit from legal punishment; because, as we said before, none Is in danger of his life. At the same time, let it be well borne in mind, that a bill of indictment may yet be found for a crime more serious than that which the present Jury have recorded, and that a conviction, even to the extent of Manslaughter, would not be without advantage to society.