The Sun. — 1824-10-14 (London, England)

DEAT 11-WAII It AN IS.  There is scarcely anypopular opinion more erroneous than that which has obtained almost universally relating to the mode in which the order is made for the execution of criminals who are sentenced to death at the Old Bailey• Sessions. It is generally believed, that on these sad occasions it is necessary that the King should affix his sign-manual to a death-warrant, as it is usually termed : this is not the fact. Those who are better informed as to the laws of their country are aware that no such invidious duty devolves on the Sovereign—he sigas pardons, `hut not death-warrants ; in truth, there is no such thing as a death-warant, in the common' acceptation of.the term. The law of the land Swards the punishment of death upon those who'sfrall be guilty of certain crimes ; and it is well known that no report is made to the king of prisoners capitally convicted at the Assizes, unless the Judge thinks tit to do so. In London .and Middlesex it is otherwise, except on convictions for murder; and then the order of the Court is sufficient warrant to'the Sheriffs to execute. At a certain period after the termination of the Old Bailey Sessions, it is the duty orate Recorder of London to submit to the Lard Chancellor a report of the capital convicts,which is subsequently laid before the King in Council, and there the respective cases are discussed and decided upon : the result is communicated imtne. diately to the Sheriffq, in an order signed by the Recorder, and sealed with black wax, setting forth the names of all the prisoners, and ordering the execution of certain individual, and expressing that the rest are respited during his Majesty's pleasure. Thus, in point of fact, the report is made for the benevolent purpose of affe'rtling the Sovereign an opportunity of ascertaining how many :of the lives of the wretched convicts can be saved,'Consistently with the duty which he owes tit the welfare of society ; and not for the. purpose of his ordering what number of them shall suffer death. There have been occasions wherein the personal feelings of the King would have inclined him to spare the life of an individual, but the general sentiment of the Privy Council has been so decidedly adverse, as to discourage the interposition of •the Royal clemency. An instance occurred since the acces. sion of his present Majesty, when exertions almost without parallel were made on behalf of a person under sentence of death for forgery, 'hose previous character had been exemplary, and whose family and connexions were highly respectable. Noblemen and gentlemen of rank put forth their utmost powers of intercession. Mr. , a much respected Member of Parliament, obtained a private interview with the King, to whom his Majesty observed, that he had never witnessed such interest as had been, made in the case referred to, and that he was cordially disposed to save the unhappy man from an ignominious death, but it could not be effected, for there was not a single hand in the Council held up in his favour ; thus the law was left to take its course. His Majesty, under such circumstances, however humane his -feelings,could not, as a Constitutional King, consistently 'exercise his prerogative of mercy in direct opposition to the unanimous opinion of his legal advisers.  THE LONDON JOUItNALS.  DAILY  Extracts from the Morning Papers, Oct. 14.  [