Death-Warrants.
There is searcely any popular opinion more eryoneous than that which has obtained almost universally relating to the mode in which the order is made for the execution of cri- minals who are sentenced to death at the Old Bailey ses- sions. It is generally believed, that on these sad occasions it is necessary that the Kinfig sh~ould a1l his sign-manual to a death-warrant, as it is usually termed: this is not the fact. Those who are better informned as to the laws of- their country are aware that no such invi(lious duty de- volves on the Sovereign-he signs pardons, but not death- warrants; in truth, there is no such thing as a death-war- rant, in the common acceptation of the term. The law of the land awards the punishment of death upon those who shall be guilty of certain crimes; and it is wvell knovnvi that no report is made to the King of prisoners capitally convicted at the assises, unless the Judge thinks fit to do so. In London and Middlesex it is otherwise, except on convictions for murder; and then the order of the Court is sufficient warrant to the Sheriffs to execute. At a certain period after the termination of the Old Bailey sessions, it is the duty of the Recorder of London to submit to the Lord Chancellor a report of the capit0l conviots, which is subse- quently laid before the King In Council, and there the re- spective cases are discussed and decided upon: the result is communicated immediately to the Sheriffs, in an order sig ned by the Recorder, and sealed with black wax, setting forth the names of all the prisoners, and ordering the execution of certain individuals, and expressing that the rest are respited during His Majesty's pleasure. Thus, in point of fact, the report is made tbr the benevolent pur- pose of affording the Sovereign an opportunity of aseertain- ing how many of the lives of the wretched convicts can be saved, consistently with the duty which he owes to the welfare of society; and not for the purpose of his ordering what number of them shall suffer death. There have been occasions wherein the personal feelings of the King would have inclined him to spare the life of an individuial: but the general sentiment of the Privy Council has been so decidedly adverse, as to discou- rage eheinterpositionof theRoyal clemency. An instance oc- curred since the accession of hiis present Majesty, when ex- ertions almost without a parallel were made on behalf of a person under sentenee of death for forgery, whose previous character had been exeruplary, and whose family and cDn- nexions were highly respectable. Noblemen and gentle- men of rank put forth their utmost powers of intercession. Mr. -, a much respected mernber of Parliament, obtained a private interview with the Xing, to whom His Majesty observed, that he had never witnessed such interest as had been mnade in the case referred to_auoihat b&.wea-co- tlially disposed to save the unhappy 'man from an ignoimi- nious death, but it couldl not be effected, for there was not a single hand in the Council held up in his favour; thus the law was left to take its course. His Majesty, under such circumstances, however humane his feelings, could not, as a constitutional King, consistently exercise his prerogative of merey in direct opposition to the unanimous opinion of his legaI advisers. DEATH- WARRAANT.