forfeits his honor, no sense of moral duty controuls his actions. No sooner is the barrier between right and wrong thrown down, no sooner is the first admonition of conscience. disregarded, than a pernicious distinction is drawn between expediency and virtue. One offence leads to another: each succeeding transgression exceeds the former in magnitude: the mind becomes gradually reconciled to crime: the example and persuasion of experienced profligates, drives from the once spotless bosom the last lingering feelings of integrity: forgery succeeds to theft, and murder follows forgery: and when the wretched victim ascends the scaffold on which he is to expiate his crimes, he calls to mind the peaceful days of innocence, and curses the hour in which he first listened to that delusive sophistry, which represented honest industry as the toil of slaves, and self-respect and mental independence the cunning artifice of a grasping and tyrannical aristocracy.

Many may admit the impolicy of the existing poor laws, and perceive their tendency to destroy the principles of self-respect and moral duty among the lower orders, who may inquire, what substitute can be provided? This question presents itself immediately, and however great the difficulties

may seem, the remedy is in fact easy and simple. In the first place, be it remembered, that no absolute necessity exists for any continuance of the system of parochial relief, for on the continent, and in Ireland, no such laws exist. But if it should be argued, that it would be unjust to deprive the poor of those funds which they have considered as their resource in poverty, we concede the point to a certain extent. We should regret the enactment of any expost facto law, which, by its retrospective action, should deprive either the poor of the rates, or the clergy of their tithes such a proceeding would be highly unconstitutional; but there is no injustice in destroying a vested interest, if adequate compensation is awarded. The most unobjectionable plan for abolishing the poor rates appears to be the one suggested some years since by Mr. Malthus. That eminent economist proposed that a law should be passed to take effect two years after its enactment, by which interval of delay, between the making of the law, and the commencement of its operation, two material points would be obtained: first, sufficient notice would be given to all who contemplated marriage, that they would have to support their own children; secondly, no injustice would be done to any persons actually in existence. It is to be hoped that in the

present Session of Parliament the legislature will carry this measure into effect, and thus dry up this fruitful source of idleness, pauperism, degeneracy of spirit, and immoral and licentious depravity.

In an enumeration of the secondary causes of national demoralization, it is impossible to overlook the criminal code; which has familiarized the people with blood, and the dreadful frequency of capital punishment, produced a callous and hardened indifference to death. If a stranger were to form an opinion of the degree of humanity and civilization which prevailed in Britain, from an inspection of its criminal code, he would pronounce the country to be immersed in a ferocious barbarism. But if he pursued his investigations, he would find his first impressions falsified and refuted by the variety of charitable institutions which are supported in every town and city of the empire. And if the inquirer were a man of enlarged mind and liberal sentiments, he would separate the acts of the governors from the acts of the governed, and by drawing this just and equitable distinction, the people at large would be acquitted of the guilt of inhumanity, however justly the charge of indifference might be affixed to an independent and self-constituted legisla

ture. It is trifling for a defender of the present system to reply, that the ministers, during the last fifty years, have been as humane as the rest of the country: the assertion, however confidently uttered, is false; for if they had been determined to modify the criminal code, what rational man can doubt their power? It is impossible, in the present state of knowledge, to mask or disguise truth: in such an attempt, the most ingenious sophist would fail; and however national vanity may have induced the panegyrists of the British Constitution and Government to exalt this island above all other nations, the facts of history refute the assumption. The following extract is sufficient to show how egregiously they err, who presume that men of rank are incapable of inhumanity: "The accomplished

and sentimental Sir Thomas More caused Lutherans to be whipped, tortured, and burnt alive, in his presence. Cranmer led Arians and Anabaptists to the stake. Bonner, Bishop of London, tore off the beard of a weaver, who refused to relinquish his tenets; in another instance of the same kind, he scourged a man until his arm ached with the exercise; and held the hand of a third to a candle, to give him a specimen of burning, till the sinews and veins shrunk and burst. Even Wriothesley the Chancellor of England, directed a young

and beautiful woman to be stretched on the -rack, for having differed with him concerning the real presence; with his own arm he tore her body asunder, and caused her body to be committed to the flames. In fine, infants born at the stake, were thrown into the fire with their parents, as partaking of the same heresy. These are by no means solitary or isolated instances of cruelty; numerous examples, equally horrible, might be adduced; but the collection of them would be as painful to the reader to peruse, as to the author to record. Enough has been brought forward to

**

* Eden's Principles of Penal Law.

† Among the most appalling punishments inflicted by the old penal code of England, may be placed the "Peine forte et dure," and as the legal consequences of this enactment are remarkable, it is presumed that the following account will not be unacceptable to the reader. When a criminal refused to plead to an indictment, and remained mute, he was adjudged to be contumacious; and if he persisted in his silence, he was laid naked on the ground, with a considerable weight upon his chest, which was gradually increased till he either pleaded or died. Such was the horrid torture for extorting an answer, it may be readily supposed .that very few criminals continued obstinate; but there is one instance on record which has induced us to add this note for the purpose of explaining the legal consequences of the punishment. A Mr. Calverly suspected his wife of incontinence, and in a paroxysm of rage murdered her; after which, he threw from the top of his house his seven chil