The Prose Works of Percy Bysshe Shelley, Vol. 2 [of 2]Shelley, Percy Bysshe
General
The Prose Works of Percy Bysshe Shelley, Vol. 2 [of 2]
Shelley, Percy Bysshe
English prose literature
You preside over a court which is instituted for the suppression of
crime, and to whose authority the people submit on no other conditions
than that its decrees should be conformable to justice.
If it should be demonstrated that a judge had condemned an innocent
man, the bare existence of laws in conformity to which the accused
is punished, would but little extenuate his offence. The inquisitor
when he burns an obstinate heretic may set up a similar plea, yet few
are sufficiently blinded by intolerance to acknowledge its validity.
It will less avail such a judge to assert the policy of punishing
one who has committed no crime. Policy and morality ought to be
deemed synonymous in a court of justice, and he whose conduct has
been regulated by the latter principle, is not justly amenable to any
penal law for a supposed violation of the former. It is true, my Lord,
laws exist which suffice to screen you from the animadversions of any
constituted power, in consequence of the unmerited sentence which you
have passed upon Mr. Eaton; but there are no laws which screen you
from the reproof of a nation’s disgust, none which ward off the just
judgment of posterity, if that posterity will deign to recollect you.
By what right do you punish Mr. Eaton? What but antiquated precedents,
gathered from times of priestly and tyrannical domination, can be
adduced in palliation of an outrage so insulting to humanity and
justice? Whom has he injured? What crime has he committed? Wherefore
may he not walk abroad like other men and follow his accustomed
pursuits? What end is proposed in confining this man, charged with the
commission of no dishonourable action? Wherefore did his aggressor
avail himself of popular prejudice, and return no answer but one of
common place contempt to a defence of plain and simple sincerity?
Lastly, when the prejudices of the jury, as Christians, were strongly
and unfairly inflamed[41] against this injured man as a Deist,
wherefore did not you, my Lord, check such unconstitutional pleading,
and desire the jury to pronounce the accused innocent or criminal[42]
without reference to the particular faith which he professed?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account