272 My Inabilities. [Sept. 



forged notes, purporting to be of the Bank of England, of £6 each, pleaded 



GUILTV. 



" Mr. Justice Littledak. Prisoner, there are five indictments against you 

 for paying away forged notes. I can only tell you, you will receive exactly 

 the same punishment as if you were found guilty by the jury. You will be 

 punished, whether by hanging or transportation, precisely the same ; and I 

 must tell you, that a great number of persons have been hanged for a similar 

 offence to that you are charged with. If you expect any less punishment 

 from pleading guilty, you are deceiving yourself. Do you persist in pleading 

 guilty ? 



" Prisoner. Yes. 



" Judge. This is a very serious case which is charged upon you : you are 

 liable to be hanged. 



" Prisoner. Well, have mercy on me ! 



" Judge. Do you still plead guilty ? 



" Prisoner. I wish to speak the truth, as near as I can. 



" Judge. I must tell you, as I told you before, that if you expect to be 

 dealt more leniently with by pleading guilty, you are mistaken ; yoiu- 

 punishment will be precisely the same. Pleading not guilty to an indictment, 

 is not telling a falsehood hi the name of God ; it is not taking an oath ; or 

 committing perjury : it is onlt/ denying the charge, which must be proved 

 by the prosecutor. 



" Prisoner. I must plead guilty, my Lord. 



" Judge. Consider, prisoner— I will allow you time for consideration. 

 C After a few minutes ]iause.J 



" Prisoner. I am guilty, my Lord. 



" Judge. Then you are determined to plead guilty.^ 



" Prisoner. Yes; and have mercy on me ! 



" Judge. I ask you, once for all, do you determine to plead guilty ? 

 " Prisoner. Yes, my Lord. 



" Judge. Very well. (The prisoner was then removed from the bar.)" 



What a sorry exhibition is this ! To see a Judge, on the very judg- 

 ment-seat, quil)bling jesuitically upon the distinction between simple 

 and compound lying — between a lie in the .?ight of God, and a lie in the 

 nuine of God — between mere naked falsehood, and falsehood heightened 

 into perjury by the solemnity of an oath ! The prisoner was either 

 guilty, or not guilty ; and, before trial, he alone was competent to 

 declare in whicli predicament he stood. He does make the declaration : 

 he confesses his guilt ; not in the hope of obtaining mercy — for the Judge 

 emphatically warns him of the fallacy of such hope — but from a con- 

 scientious repugnance to aggravate the crime he has committed by a fresh 

 one; when the Judge, in what he believes to be the discharge of his 

 duty, informs him that, to deny his guilt, in defiance of his own know- 

 ledge that he is guilty, is "072/7/ "denying the charge which must be proved 

 by the prosecutor." Only! only telling a deliberate lie ! All the law- 

 yers in England, entrenched up to their teeth in precedents and technical 

 sophistries, cannot make the assertion of falsehood a truth. If there be 

 any good reason why a man should be asked, at all, Avhether he is guilty 

 or not guilty, when his reply either way does not matter a straw, surely 

 there can be none why he should be persuaded to renounce his volun- 

 tary confession of guilt, and plead his innocence, for the miserable 

 mockery, in such a case, of being proved guilty in the regular way of 

 legal business ! 



