198 
upon themselves only, but that their parents, their wives, their chil- 
dren, and relations, must all participate in the pains and penalties to 
be imposed, they will desist from the perpetration of crime, through 
tenderness to their family and connexions. Again, let it be con- 
sidered, that, according to the law, the Eric was to be imposed in 
a greater or lesser degree, upon the entire tribe to which the male- 
factor belonged, and it will be perceived, that it was the interest of 
every person to keep a strict watch on the actions of his tribesmen, 
and to prevent the commission of a crime, which would certainly 
bring loss upon himself and all his relations. By the payment of 
Eric, the malefactor was punished, and the person injured re- 
ceived some compensation for his losses: an act of justice more 
satisfactory, more equitable, and more productive of salutary con- 
sequences, than some of those sanguinary punishments prescribed by 
modern civilization. 
The law of Eric, the candid and judicious Doctor Warner calls 
*« the law of retaliation.” Contrary to Spencer, Davis, and others, 
he says, “ that by the tenor of this law the people of Ireland were 
brought to more humanity, honesty, and good manners of every 
kind, than they ever were before.—It is not only the most equi- 
table in itself, I presume to say, that can be conceived, against 
wilful injury, but in its consequences bids fairer than any other to 
“* promote public order and integrity..—He adds, “ We presume 
too much on our power of making laws, and too far infringe on 
« the command of God, by taking away the lives of men in the 
« manner we do in England, for theft and robbery ; and th’s is not 
only aperniciouserror,—‘ for extreme justice is an extreme injury’— 
but a national abomination. —The wilfulness of the crime is no 
excuse for making the punisfiment exceed the heinousness of the 
“ transgression ; and whio will say that a little theft or robbery,— 
