THE PENGE CASE. [To THE EDITOR OF THE " SPEOTATOR.1
Sin,—While fully concurring with your article on the agitation in this matter and on the Cannon-Street meeting, I muosteaxpskonleenats.ve
n to express a view which as yet seems to have found., The deference claimed—and in most cases, claimed with some- reaso.n—for the verdict of the jury, is in this case out of the question. The jury have themselves certified their own inca- pacity, or worse than incapacity. They have found two women guilty of murder, a murder of unparalleled atrocity, and have re- commended both to mercy, and one "strongly." Either the female culprits did not seem to the jury to be really guilty—and in that case the verdict is morally an attempt to punish as murder mere immorality, with which the law has no concern—or the jury believed them accomplices in a deliberate and cruel assassination;. and in that case, the recommendation to mercy is an act of de- liberate perjury, in the first place, and of gross dereliction of public duty, in the second.
It is impossible on any plea to defend the verdict as re- gards the women ; impossible, therefore, to feel the least. respect for the decicision of the jury. Indeed, I suppose that no man of education and intelligence who has watched the course of justice entertains any other feelings than. amazement and contempt for juries in general. If they did) not commonly obey implicitly the directions of the Judge, the preposterous folly of their verdicts would ere now have compelled, England to abolish trial by jury, except in political oases. I take. it that nine thoughtful men in ten will agree with me when I say. that, if innocent, I should infinitely prefer to be tried by a Judge. alone. If guilty, the stronger the evidence against me, the more I should wish for a jury, since trial by twelve ignorant and silly. men is little better than trial by lottery. I can only conceive two. worse forms of judgment—trial by journal, and trial by public meeting—both of which are coming dangerously into play. Hap- pily we have at last a Home Secretary conscientious and courage- ous enough to disregard both the Press and the rabble, or so- called public. I wish I could hope that he would equally disregardi the incoherent folly of the jury.—I am, Sir, &c., PERCY GREG.
Previous page
