Geeek compounds draw back their accents. He may trace verbs in iu from polysyllables in iw, or derive endless glory from marking down derivatives in Tw, changing the & of their primitives into iota.

ε

is a philosophical amusement: but whoever thinks of learning the grammar of their own tongue before they are very good grammarians? Let us hear what Mr. Locke says upon this subject: If grammar ought to be taught at any time, it must be to one that can speak the language already; how else can he be taught the grammar of it? This at least is evident, from the practice of the wise and learned nations amongst the ancients. They made it a part of education to cultivate their own, not foreign languages. The Greeks counted all other nations barbarous, and had a contempt for their languages. And though the Greek learning grew in credit amongst the Romans towards the end of their commonwealth, yet it was the Roman tongue that was made the study of their youth: their own language they were to make use of, and therefore it was their own language they were instructed and exercised in.

grammar, who does not intend to be a critic, or make speeches, and write despatches in it. When any one finds in himself a necessity or disposition to study any foreign language to the bottom, and to be nicely exact in the knowledge of it, it will be time enough to take a grammatical survey of it. If his use of it be only to understand some books writ in it, without a critical knowledge of the tongue itself, reading alone, as I have said, will attain that end, without charging the mind with the multiplied rules and intricacies of grammar.'-Locke on Education, p. 78, folio.

Thus in the Hamiltonian method, a good deal of grammar necessarily impresses itself upon the mind (chemin faisant), as it does in the vernacular tongue, without any rule at all, and merely by habit. How is it possible to read many Latin keys, for instance, without remarking, willingly or unwillingly, that the first persons of verbs end in o, the second in s, the third in t?-that the same adjective ends in us or a, accordingly as the connected substantive is masculine or feminine, and other such gross and common rules? An Englishman who means to say, I will go to London, does not say, I could go to London. He never read a word of grammar in his life; but he has learnt, by habit, that the word go, signifies to proceed or set forth, and by the same habit he learns that future in- But, more particularly, to determine the proper tentions are expressed by I will; and by the same season for grammar, I do not see how it can reasonahabit the Hamiltonian pupil, reading over, and com- bly be made any one's study, but as an introduction prehending twenty times more words and phrases than to rhetoric. When it is thought time to put any one the pupil of the ancient system, insensible but infalli- upon the care of polishing his tongue, and of speaking bly fixes upon his mind many rules of grammar. We better than the illiterate, then is the time for him to are far from meaning to say, that the grammar thus be instructed in the rules of grammar, and not before. acquired will be sufficiently accurate for the first-rate For grammar being to teach men not to speak, but to Latin and Greek scholar; but there is no reason why speak correctly, and according to the exact rules of a young person arriving at this distinction, and educa- the tongue, which is one part of elegancy, there is ted in the Hamiltonian system, may not carry the little use of the one to him that has no need of the study of grammar to any degree of minuteness and other. Where rhetoric is not necessary, grammar accuracy. The only difference is, that he begins may be spared. I know not why any one should grammar as a study, after he has made a considera-waste his time, and beat his head about the Latin ble progress in the language, and not before-a very important feature in the Hamiltonian system, and a very great improvement in the education of children. The imperfections of the old system proceed in a great measure from a bad and improvident accumulation of difficulties, which must all, perhaps, though in a less degree, at one time or another be encountered, but which may be, and in the Hamiltonian system are, much more wisely distributed. A boy who sits down to Greek with lexicon and grammar, has to master an unknown language-to look out words in a lexicon, in the use of which he is inexpert-to guess, by many trials, in which of the numerous senses detailed in the lexicon he is to use the word-to attend to the inflections of cases and tense-to become acquainted with the syntax of the language-and to become ac- 'Nomina anomala quæ contrahuntur sunt, Оλoñañ, quæ quainted with these inflexions and this syntax from contrahuntur in omnibus, ut yoos yous, &c. 'Oriyomat, quæ books written in foreign languages, and full of the in paucioribus casibus contrahuntur, ut substantiva Barytonia most absurd and barbarous terms, and this at the ten-in up. Imparyllatria in ovp,' &c. &c. derest age, when the mind is utterly unfit to grapple with any great difficulty; and the boy, who revolts at all this folly and absurdity, is set down for a dunce, and must go into a marching regiment, or on board a man of war! The Hamiltonian pupil has his word looked out for him, its proper sense ascertained, the case of the substantive, the inflexions of the verb pointed out, and the syntaxical arrangement placed before his eyes. Where, then, is he to encounter these difficulties? Does he hope to escape them en. tirely? Certainly not, if it is his purpose to become a great scholar; but he will enter upon them when the character is familiar to his eye-when a great number of Greek words are familiar to his eye and ear-when he has practically mastered a great deal of grammar-when the terminations of verbs convey to him different modifications of time, the terminations of substantives different varieties of circumstance -when the rules of grammar, in short, are a confirmation of previous observation, not an irksome multitude of directions, heaped up without any opportunity of immediate application.

The real way of learning a dead language, is to initate, as much as possible, the method in which a living language is naturally learnt. When do we ever find a well educated Englishman or Frenchman embarrassed by an ignorance of the grammar of their respective languages? They first learn it practically and unerringly; and then, if they choose and look back and smile at the idea of having proceeded by a number of rules without knowing one of them by heart, or being conscious that they had any rule at all, this

In the Eton Grammar, the following very plain and elementary information is conveyed to young gentlemen utterly ignorant of every syllable of the language :

From the Westminster Grammar we make the fol lowing extract-and some thousand rules, conveyed in poetry of equal merit, must be fixed upon the mind of the youthful Grecian, before he advances into the interior of the language.

o finis thematis finis utriusque futuri est
Post liquidam in primo, vel in unoquoque secundo,
w circumflexum est. Ante w finale character
Explicitus σ primi est implicitusque futuri

w itaque in quo o quasi plexum est solitu in ow.'
Westminster Greek Grammar, 1814.

Such are the easy initiations of our present methods of teaching. The Hamiltonian system, on the other hand, 1. teaches an unknown tongue by the closest interlinear translation, instead of leaving a boy to explore his way by the lexicon or dictionary. 2. It postpones the study of grammar till a considerable progress has been made in the language, and a great degree of practical grammar has been acquired. 3. It substitutes the cheerfulness and competition of the Lancasterian system for the dull solitude of the dictionary. By these means, a boy finds he is making a progress, and learning something from the very beginning. He is not overwhelmed with the first appearance of insuperable difficulties; he receives some little pay from the first moment of his apprenticeship, and is not compelled to wait for remuneration till he is out of his time. The student having acquired the great art of understanding the sense of what is written in another tongue, may go into the study of the lan

guage as deeply and as extensively as he pleases. | tion, not the result of solicitation-and we have no The old system aims at beginning with a depth and reason to doubt it-it is a warning which the legislaaccuracy which many men never will want, which ture cannot neglect, if it mean to avoid the disgrace of disgusts many from arriving even at moderate attain- seeing the lower and middle orders of mankind making ments, and is a less easy, and not more certain road laws for themselves, which the government is at to a profound skill in languages, than if attention to length compelled to adopt as measures of their own. grammar had been deferred to a later period. The judges and the Parliament would have gone on to this day, hanging, by wholesale, for the forgeries of bank notes, if juries had not become weary of the con. tinual butchery, and resolved to acquit. The proper execution of laws must always depend, in great mea sure, upon public opinion; and it is undoubtedly most discreditable to any men intrusted with power, when the governed turn round upon their governors, and say, Your laws are so cruel, or so foolish, we cannot and will not act upon them.'

In fine, we are strongly persuaded, that the time being given, this system will make better scholars; and the degree of scholarship being given, a much shorter time will be needed. If there is any truth in this, it will make Mr. Hamilton one of the most useful men of his age; for if there is any thing which fills reflecting men with melancholy and regret, it is the waste of mortal time, parental money, and puerile happiness, in the present method of pursuing Latin and Greek.

The particular improvement, of allowing counsel to those who are accused of felony, is so far from being unnecessary, from any extraordinary indulgence shown

COUNSEL FOR PRISONERS. (EDINBURGH RE- to English prisoners, that we really cannot help sus

VIEW, 1826.)

Stockton on the Practice of not allowing Counsel for Prisoners accused of Felony. 8vo. London, 1826.

On the sixth of April, 1824, Mr. George Lamb, (a gentleman who is always the advocate of whatever is honest and liberal), presented the following petition from several jurymen in the habit of serving on juries at the Old Bailey: :

pecting, that not a year elapses in which many innocent persons are not found guilty. How is it possible, indeed, that it can be otherwise? There are seventy or eighty persons to be tried for various offences at the assizes, who have lain in prison for some months; and fifty of whom, perhaps, are of the lowest order of the people, without friends in any better condition than themselves, and without one single penny to employ in their defence. How are they to obtain witnesses? That your petitioners, fully sensible of the invaluable No attorney can be employed-no subpœna can be privilege of jury trials, and desirous of seeing them as com- taken out; the witnesses are fifty miles off, perhapsplete as human institutions will admit, feel it their duty to totally uninstructed-living from hand to mouthdraw the attention of the House to the restrictions imposed utterly unable to give up their daily occupation to pay on the prisoner's counsel, which, they humbly conceive, for their journey, or for their support when arrived at have strong claims to legislative remedy. With every dis- the town of trial-and, if they could get there, not position to decide justly, the petitioners have found, by experience, in the course of their attendance as jurymen in knowing where to go, or what to do. It is impossible the old Bailey, that the opening statements for the prosecu- but that a human being, in such a helpless situation, tion too frequently leave an impression more unfavourable must be found guilty; for, as he cannot give evidence to the prisoner at the bar, than the evidence of itself could for himself, and has not a penny to fetch those who have produced; and it has always sounded harsh to the pe- can give it for him, any story told against him must titioners to hear it announced from the bench, that the be taken for true (however false); since it is impos counsel, to whom the prisoner has committed his defence, sible for the poor wretch to contradict it. A brother cannot be permitted to address the jury in his behalf, nor reply to the charges which have, or have not, been substan- or a sister may come-and support every suffering and tiated by the witnesses. The petitioners have felt their sit- privation themselves in coming; but the prisoner uation peculiarly painful and embarrassing when the pri- cannot often have such claims upon the persons who soner's faculties, perhaps surprised by such an intimation, have witnessed the transaction, nor any other claims are too much absorbed in the difficulties of his unhappy cir- but those which an unjustly accused person has upon cumstances to admit of an effort towards his own justifica- those whose testimony can exculpate him-and who tion, against the statements of the prosecutor's counsel, probably must starve themselves and their families to often unintentionally aggravated through zeal or misconception; and it is purely with a view to the attainment of do it. It is true, a case of life and death will rouse impartial justice, that the petitioners humbly submit to the the poorest persons, every now and then, to extraor serious consideration of the House the expediency of allow-dinary exertions, and they may tramp through mud ing every accused person the full benefit of counsel, as in and dirt to the assize town to save a life--though even cases of misdemeanour, and according to the practice of

the civil courts."

With the opinions so sensibly and properly expressed by these jurymen, we most cordially agree. We have before touched incidentally on this subject; but shall now give to it a more direct and a fuller examination. We look upon it as a very great blot in our over-praised criminal code; and no effort of ours shall be wanting, from time to time, for its removal.

*

this effort is precarious enough: but imprisonment, hard labour, or transportation, appeal less forcibly than death, and would often appeal for evidence in vain, to the feeble and limited resources of extreme poverty. It is not that a great proportion of those accused are not guilty-but that some are not-and are utterly without means of establishing their innocence. We do not believe they are often accused from wilful and corrupt perjury: but the prosecutor is himself mistaken. The crime has been committed; and in his thirst for vengeance, he has got hold of the wrong man. The wheat was stolen out of the barn; and, amidst many other collateral circumstances, the witnesses (paid and brought up by a wealthy prosecutor, who is repaid by the county), swear that they saw a man, very like the prisoner, with a sack of corn upon his shoulder, at an early hour of the morning, going from the barn in the direction of the prisoner's cottage! Here is one link, and a very material link, of a long

We have now the benefit of discussing these subjects under the government of a home secretary of state, whom we may (we believe) fairly call a wise, honest, and high principled man-as he appears to us, without wishing for innovation, or having any itch for it, not to be afraid of innovation, when it is gradual and well considered. He is, indeed, almost the only person we remember in his station, who has not considered sound sense to consist in the rejection of every improvement, and loyalty to be proved by the defence of every accidental, imperfect, or superannuated in-chain of circumstantial evidence. Judge and jury

stitution.

If this petition of jurymen be a real bond fide peti

must give it weight, till it is contradicted. In fact, the prisoner did not steal the corn; he was, to be sure, out of his cottage at the same hour-and that *We must always except the Catholic question. Mr. also is proved-but travelling in a totally different Peel's opinions on this subject (giving him credit for sinceri- direction,-and was seen to be so travelling by a stage ty), have always been a subject of real surprise to us. It coachman passing by, and by a market gardener. An must surely be some mistake between the right honourable attorney with money in his pocket, whom every mo gentleman and his chaplain! They have been travelling together; and some of the parson's notions have been put ment of such employ made richer by six-and-eight up in Mr. Peel's head by mistake. We yet hope he will re- pence, would have had the two witnesses ready, and turn them to their rightful owner. at rack and manger, from the first day of the assise;

and the innocence of the prisoner would have been established: but by what possible means is the destitute ignorant wretch himself to find or to produce such witnesses? or how can the most humane jury, and the most acute judge, refuse to consider him as guilty, till his witnesses are produced? We have not the slightest disposition to exaggerate, and, on the contrary, should be extremely pleased to be convinced that our apprehensions were unfounded: but we have often felt extreme pain at the hopeless and unprotected state of prisoners; and we cannot find any answer to our suspicions, or discover any means by which this perversion of justice, under the present state of the law, can be prevented from taking place. Against the prisoner are arrayed all the resources of an angry prosecutor, who has certainly (let who will be the culprit) suffered a serious injury. He has his hand, too, in the public purse; for he prosecutes at the expense of the county. He cannot even relent; for the inagistrate is bound over to indict. His witnesses cannot fail him; for they are all bound over by the same magistrate to give evidence. He is out of prison, too, and can exert himself.

The prisoner, on the other hand, comes into court, squalid and depressed from long confinement-utterly unable to tell his own story from want of words and want of confidence, and is unable to produce evidence for want of money. His fate accordingly is obvious; -and that there are many innocent men punished every year, for crimes they have not committed, appears to us to be extremely probable. It is, indeed, scarcely possible it should be otherwise: and, as if to prove the fact, every now and then, a case of this kind is detected. Some circumstances come to light between sentence and execution; immense exertions are made by humane men; time is gained, and the innocence of the condemned person completely established. In Elizabeth Caning's case, two women were capitally convicted, ordered for execution-and at last found innocent, and respited. Such, too, was the case of the men who were sentenced ten years ago, for the robbery of Lord Cowper's steward. 'I have myself (says Mr. Scarlett) often seen persons I thought innocent convicted, and the guilty escape, for want of some acute and intelligent counsel to show the bearing of the different circumstances on the conduct and situation of the prisoner.'-(House of Commons Debates, April 25th, 1826.) We were delighted to see, in this last debate, both Mr. Brougham and Mr. Scarlett profess themselves friendly to Mr. Lamb's

motion.

erally wrote his Commentaries late in the evening, with a bottle of wine before him; and little did he think, as each sentence fell from the glass and pen, of the immense influence it might hereafter exercise upon the laws and usages of his country. 'Itis' (says this favourite writer)not at all of a piece with the rest of the humane treatment of prisoners by the English law; for upon what face of reason can that assistance be denied to save the life of a man, which yet is allowed him in prosecutions for every petty trespass?' Nor, indeed, strictly speaking, is it a part of our ancient law; for the Mirror, having observed the necessity of counsel in civil suits, who know how to forward and defend the cause by the rules of law and customs of the realm, immediately subjoins, and more necessary are they for defence upon indictment and appeals of felony, than upon any other venial crimes." To the authority of Blackstone may be added that of Sir John Hall, in Hollis's case; of Sir Robert Atkyns, in Lord Russell's case; and of Sir Bartholomew Shower, in the arguments for a New Bill of Rights, in 1682. In the name of God,' says this judge, what harm can accrue to the public in general, or to any man in particular, that, in cases of Statetreason, counsel should not be allowed to the accused? What rule of justice is there to warrant its denial, when, in a civil case of a halfpenny cake, he may plead either by himself or by his advocate? That the court is counsel for the prisoner can be no effectual reason; for so they are for each party, that right may be done.'-(Somer's Tracts, vol. ii. p. 568.) In the trial of Thomas Rosewell, a dissenting clergyman, for high treason in 1684, Judge Jeffries, in summing up, confessed to the jury, 'that he thought it a hard case, that a man should have counsel to defend himself for a twopenny trespass, and his witnesses be examined upon oath; but if he stole, committed murder or felony, nay, high treason, where life, estate, honour, and all were concerned, that he should neither have counsel, nor have his witnesses examined upon oath.'-Howell's State Trials, vol. x. p. 207.

There have been two capital errors in the criminal codes of feudal Europe, from which a great variety of mistake and injustice have proceeded; the one, a disposition to confound accusation with guilt; the other, to mistake a defence of prisoners accused by the crown, for disloyalty and disaffection to the crown; and from these errors our own code has been slowly and gradually recovering, by all those struggies and exertions which it always costs to remove folly sanctioned by antiquity. In the early periods of our history, the accused person could call no evidence :-then, for a long time, his evidence against the king could not be examined upon oath; consequently, he might as well have produced none, as all the evidence against him was upon oath. Till the reign of Anne, no one accused of felony could produce witnesses upon oath; and the old practice was vindicated, in opposition to the new one, introduced under the statute of that day, on the grounds of humanity and tenderness to the prisoner! because, as his witnesses were not restricted by an oath, they were at liberty to indulge in simple falsehood as much as they pleased;-so argued the blessed defenders of nonsense in those days. Then it was ruled to be indecent and improper that counsel should be employed against the crown; and, therefore, the prisoner accused of treason could have no counsel to assist him in the trial. Counsel might indeed stay in the court, but apart from the prisoner, with whom they could have no communication. They were not allowed to put any question, or to suggest any doubtful point of law; but if the prisoner (likely to be a weak unlettered man) could himself suggest any doubt in matter of law, the court determined first if the question of law should be entertained, and then assigned counsel to argue it. In those times, the jury were punishable if they gave a false verdict against the king, but were not punishable if they gave a false verdict against the prisoner. The preamble of the Act of 1696 runs thus- Whereas it is expedient that Nothing can be done in any discussion upon any persons charged with high treason should make a full point of law in England, without quoting Mr. Justice and sufficient defence. Might it not be altered to Blackstone. Mr. Justice Blackstone, we believe, gen-persons charged with any species or degree of crime?

But in how many cases has the injustice proceeded without any suspicion being excited? and even if we could reckon upon men being watchful in capital cases, where life is concerned, we are afraid it is in such cases alone that they ever besiege the secretary of state, and compel his attention. We never rememany such interference to save a man unjustly condemned to the hulks or the treadmill; and yet there are certainly more condemnations to these minor punishments than to the gallows; but then it is all onewho knows or cares about it? If Harrison or Johnson has been condemned, after regular trial by jury, to six months' treadmill, because Harrison and Johnson were without a penny to procure evidence-who knows or cares about Harrison or Johnson? how can they make themselves heard? or in what way can they obtain redress? It worries rich and comfortable people to hear the humanity of our penal laws called in question. There is talk of a society for employing discharged prisoners: might not something be effected by a society instituted for the purpose of providing to poor prisoners a proper defence, and a due attendance of witnesses? But we must hasten on from this disgraceful neglect of poor prisoners, to the particular subject of complaint we have proposed to ourselves.

The proposition is, That the prisoner accused of feloly ought to have the same power of selecting counsel to speak for him as he has in cases of treason and misdemeanour, and as defendants have in all civil actions.

All these errors have given way to the force of truth, and to the power of common sense and common humanity-the Attorney and Solicitor General, for the time being, always protesting against each alteration, and regularly and officially prophesying the utter destruction of the whole jurisprudence of Great Britain. There is no man now alive, perhaps, so utterly fool ish, as to propose that prisoners should be prevented from producing evidence upon oath, and being heard by their counsel in cases of high treason; and yet it cost a struggle for seven sessions to get this measure through the two houses of Parliament. But mankind are much like the children they beget-they always make wry faces at what is to do them good; and it is necessary sometimes to hold the nose, and force the medicine down the throat. They enjoy the health and vigour consequent upon the medicine; but cuif the doctor, and sputter at his stuff!

oner to be innocent whom he thinks to be guilty? If the prisoner advances inconclusive or weak arguments, does not the judge say they are weak and inconclusive, and does he not often sum up against his own client? How then is he counsel for the prisoner? If the counsel for the prisoner were to see a strong point, which the counsel for the prosecution had missed, would he supply the deficiency of his antagonist, and urge what had been neglected to be urged? But is it not the imperious duty of the judge to do so? How then can these two functionaries stand in the same relation to the prisoner? In fact the only meaning of the phrase is this, that the judge will not suffer any undue advantage to be taken of the ignorance and helplessness of the prisoner-that he will point out any evidence or circumstance in his favour-and see that equal justice is done to both parties. But in this sense he is as much the counsel of the prosecutor as A most absurd argument was advanced in the hon. of the prisoner. This is all the judge can do, or even ourable house, tha. the practice of employing counsel pretends to do; but he can have no previous commuwould be such an expense to the prisoner!-just as if nication with the prisoner-he can have no confiden any thing was so expensive as being hanged! What tial communication in court with the prisoner before a fine topic for the ordinary! 'You are going' (says he sums up; he cannot fling the whole weight of his that exquisite divine) 'to be hanged to-morrow, it is understanding into the opposite scale against the true, but consider what a sum you have saved! Mr. counsel for the prosecution, and produce that collision Scarlett or Mr. Brougham might certainly have pre- of faculties, which, in all other cases but those of sented arguments to the jury, which would have in- felony, is supposed to be the happiest method of ar sured your acquittal; but do you forget that gentle riving at truth. Baron Garrow, in his charge to the men of their eminence must be recompensed by large grand jury at Exeter, on the 16th of August, 1824, fees, and that, if your life had been saved, you would thus expressed his opinion of a judge being counse actually have been out of pocket above 201.? You for the prisoner. It has been said, and truly said, will now die with the consciousness of having obeyed the dictates of a wise economy; and with a grateful reverence for the laws of your country, which prevents you from running into such unbounded expense-so let us now go to prayers.'

It is ludicrous enough to recollect, when the employment of counsel is objected to on account of the expense to the prisoner, that the same merciful law, which, to save the prisoner's money has denied him counsel, and produced his conviction, seizes upon all his savings the moment he is convicted.

that in criminal courts, judges were counsel for the prisoners. So undoubtedly they were, as far as they could to prevent undue prejudice, to guard against improper influence being excited against prisoners; but it was impossible for them to go farther than this; for they could not suggest the course of defence prisoners ought to pursue; for judges only saw the depo sitions so short a time before the accused appeared at the bar of their country, that it was quite impossible for them to act fully in that capacity? The learned Baron might have added, that it would be more correct to call the judge counsel for the prosecution; for his only previous instructions were the depositions for the prosecution, from which, in the absence of counsel, he examined the evidence against the pris. oner. On the prisoner's behalf he had no instructions at all.

Can any thing, then, be more flagrantly and scandalously unjust, than, in a long case of circumstantial evidence, to refuse to a prisoner the benefit of coun sel? A foot-mark, a word, a sound, a tool dropped,— all gave birth to the most ingenious inferences; and the counsel for the prosecution is so far from being blamable for entering into all these things, that they are all essential to the detection of guilt, and they are all links of a long and intricate chain: but if a close examination into, and a logical statement of, all these circumstances be necessary for the establishment of guilt, is not the same closeness of reasoning and the same logical statement necessary for the establishment of innocence? If justice cannot be done to society without the intervention of a practised and ingeni ous mind, who may connect all these links together, and make them clear to the apprehension of a jurycan justice be done to the prisoner, unless similar practice and similar ingenuity are employed to detect the flaws of the chain, and to point out the disconnection of the circumstances?

Of all false and foolish dicta, the most trite and the most absurd is that which asserts that the judge is counsel for the prisoner. We do not hesitate to say that this is merely an unmeaning phrase, invented to defend a pernicious abuse. The judge cannot be counsel for the prisoner, ought not to be counsel for the prisoner, never is counsel for the prisoner. To force an ignorant man into a court of justice, and to tell him that the judge is his counsel, appears to us quite as foolish as to set a hungry man down to his meals, and to tell him that the table was his dinner. In the first place, a counsel should always have private and previous communication with the prisoner, which the judge, of course, cannot have. The prisoner reveals to his counsel how far he is guilty, or he is not; states to him all the circumstance of his case-and might often enable his advocate, if his advocate were allow ed to speak, to explain a long string of circumstantial evidence, in a manner favourable to the innocence of his client. Of all these advantages, the judge, if he had every disposition to befriend the prisoner, is of course deprived. Something occurs to a prisoner in the course of the cause; he suggests it in a whisper to his counsel, doubtful if it is a wise point to urge or not. His counsel thinks it of importance, and would urge it, if his mouth were not shut. Can a prisoner have this secret communication with a judge, and take his advice, whether or not he, the judge, shall Is there any one gentleman in the House of Commention it to the jury? The counsel has (after all mons, who, in yielding his vote to this paltry and the evidence has been given) a bad opinion of his cli- perilous fallacy of the judge being counsel for the ent's case; but he suppresses that opinion; and it is prisoner, does not feel, that, were he himself a crimihis duty to do so. He is not to decide; that is the nal, he would prefer almost any counsel at the bar,— province of the jury: and, in spite of his own opinion, to the tender mercies of the judge? How strange his client may be innocent. He is brought there (or that any man who could make his election would would be brought there if the privilege of speech were eagerly and diligently surrender this exquisite privi allowed) for the express purpose of saying all that lege, and addict himself to the perilous practice of could be said on one side of the question. He is a giving fees to counsel ? Nor let us forget, in consid weight in one scale, and some one else holds the ba-ering judges as counsel for the prisoner, that there lance. This is the way in which truth is elicited in have been such men as Chief Justice Jeffries, Mr. civil, and would be in criminal cases. But does the Justice Page, and Mr. Justice Alybone, and that,-in Judge ever assume the appearance of believing a pris- bad times, such men may reappear. If you do not

allow me counsel,my lords (says Lord Lovat), it is im- common sense and common feeling revolt:-for it is possible for me to make any defence, by reason of my full of brutal cruelty, and of base inattention of those infirmity. I do not see, I do not hear. I come up to the who make laws, to the happiness of those for whom bar at the hazard of my life. I have fainted several laws were made. We wonder that any juryman can times, I have been up so early, ever since four o'clock convict under such a shocking violation of all natural this morning. I therefore ask for assistance; and if you justice. The iron age of Clovis and Clottaire can prodo not allow me counsel, or such aid as is necessary, duce no more atrocious violation of every good feelit will be impossible for me to make any defence at all.'ing, and every good principle. Can a sick man find Though Lord Lovat's guilt was evident, yet the man- strength and nerves to speak before a large assembly? agers of the impeachment felt so strongly the injustice can an ignorant man find words?-can a low man which was done, that, by the hands of Sir W. Young, find confidence? Is not he afraid of becoming an obthe chief manager, a bill was brought into parliament, ject of ridicule ?-can he believe that his expressions to allow counsel to persons impeached by that house, will be understood? How often have we seen a poor which was not previously the case; so that the evil is wretch, struggling against the agonies of his spirit, already done away with, in a great measure, to per- and the rudeness of his conceptions, and his awe of sons of rank: it so happens in legislation, when a better dressed men and better taught men, and the gentleman suffers, public attention is awakened to the shame which the accusation has brought upon his evil of laws. Every man who makes laws says, head, and the sight of his parents and children gazing This may be my case:' but it requires the repeated at him in the court, for the last time, perhaps, and efforts of humane men, or, as Mr. North calls them,- after a long absence? The mariner sinking in the dilettanti philosophers, to awaken the attention of wave does not want a helping hand more than does lawmakers to evils from which they are themselves this poor wretch. But help is denied to all! Age exempt. We do not say this to make the leaders of cannot have it, nor ignorance, nor the modesty of womankind unpopular, but to rouse their earnest atten- men! One hard uncharitable rule silences the defention in cases where the poor only are concerned, and ders of the wretched, in the worst of human evils; where neither good nor evil can happen to themselves. and at the bitterest of human moments, mercy is A great stress is laid upon the moderation of the blotted out from the ways of men ! opening counsel; that is, he does not conjure the farmers in the jury-box, by the love which they bear to their children-he does not declaim upon blood guiltiness he does not describe the death of Abel by Cain, the first murderer-he does not describe scattered brains, ghastly wounds, pale features, and hair clotted with gore he does not do a thousand things, which are not in English taste, and which it would be very foolish and very vulgar to do. We really allow all this. But yet, if it be a cause of importance, it is es- There is a judge now upon the bench, who never sentially necessary to our counsellor's reputation that took away the life of a fellow creature without shuthis man should be hung! And accordingly, with a ting himself up alone and giving the most profound atvery calm voice, and composed manner, and with tention to every circumstance of the case! and this many expressions of candour, he sets himself to com- solemn act he always premises with his own beauti. ment astutely upon the circumstances. Distant events ful prayer to God, that he will enlighten him with his are immediately connected; meaning is given to in- Divine Spirit in the exercise of this terrible privilege! significant facts; new motives are ascribed to innocent Now would it not be an immense satisfaction to this actions; farmer gives way after farmer in the jury-feeling and honourable magistrate, to be sure that evebox; and a rope of eloquence is woven round the pri- ry witness on the side of the prisoner had been heard, soner's neck! Every one is delighted with the talents and that every argument which could be urged in his of the advocate; and because there has been no noise, favour had been brought forward, by a man whose no violent action, and no consequent perspiration, he duty it was to see only on one side of the question, is praised for his candour and forbearance, and the len and whose interest and reputation was thoroughly em ity of our laws is the theme of universal approbation. barked in this partial exertion? If a judge fails to get In the mean time, the speech-maker and the prisoner at the truth, after these instruments of investigation are used, his failure must be attributed to the limited powers of man-not to the want of good inclination, or wise institutions. We are surprised that such a measure does not come into Parliament, with the strong recommendation of the judges. It is surely better to be a day longer on the circuit, than to murder rapidly in ermine.

know better.

We should be glad to know of any nation in the world, taxed by by kings, or even imagined by poets (except the English), who have refused to prisoners the benefit of counsel. Why is the voice of humanity heard every where else, and disregarded here? In Scotland, the accused have not only counsel to speak for them, but a copy of the indictment, and a list of the witnesses. In France, in the Netherlands, in the whole of Europe, counsel are allotted as a matter of course. Every where else but here, accusation is considered as unfavourable to the exercise of human faculties. It is admitted to be that crisis in which, above all others, an unhappy man wants the aid of cloquence, wisdom, and coolness. In France the Napoleon code has provided not only that counsel should be allowed to the prisoner, but that, as with us in Scotland, his counsel should have the last word.

Suppose a crime to have been committed under the influence of insanity; is the insane man, now convalescent, to plead his own insanity?-to offer arguments to show that he must have been mad?-and, by the glimmerings of his returning reason, to prove that, at a former period, that same reason was utterly extinct? These are the cruel situations into which judges and courts of justice are thrown by the present state of the law.

It is argued, that, among the various pleas for mercy that are offered, no prisoner has ever urged to the secretary of state the disadvantage of having no counsel to plead for him; but a prisoner who dislikes to undergo his sentence, naturally addresses to those who can reverse it such arguments only as will produce, in the opinion of the referee, a pleasing effect. He does not therefore find fault with the established system of jurisprudence, but brings forward facts and arguments to prove his own innocence. Besides, how few people there are who can elevate themselves from the acIt is a most affecting moment in a court of justice, quiescence in what is, to the consideration of what when the evidence has all been heard, and the judge ought to be; and if they could do so, the way to get asks the prisoner what he has to say in his defence. rid of a punishment is not (as we have just observed) The prisoner, who has (by great exertions, perhaps of to say, you have no right to punish me in this manhis friends,) saved up money enough to procure coun-ner,' but to say, 'I am innocent of the offence.' The sel, says to the judge, that he leaves his defence to fraudulent baker at Constantinople, who is about to be his counsel.' We have often blushed for English hu- baked to death in his own oven, does not complain of manity to hear the reply. Your counsel cannot speak the severity of baking bakers, but promises to use for you, you must speak for yourself; and this is the more flour and less fraud. reply given to a poor girl of eighteen-to a foreigner -to a deaf man-to a stammerer-to the sick-to the feeble-to the old-to the most abject and ignorant of human beings! It is a reply, we must say, at which

Whence comes it (we should like to ask Sir John Singleton Copley, who seems to dread so much the conflicts of talent in criminal cases) that a method of getting at truth which is found so serviceable in civil