tion, they will draw continually nearer to giving complete outward expression to what is within them; that is, they will constantly improve in their respective arts.

He, in like manner, who thirsts for moral excellence,— whose ambition it is to realize all that is indicated by the name Christian, he finds, in those majestic images of Christian virtues and graces, which flit across the firmament of his Reason, the spring of his noble thirst, of his high and holy ambition; and to arrest these images, and give them a permanent home in his inmost soul, and make them the counsellors of his will and the guardians of his affections, will be his settled aim and strenuous endeavour, and herein

In

consists the process of religious culture. Fail he will, again and again; but not so will he lose courage or give over. the words of the great Apostle, himself a model in this kind, "he is troubled on every side, yet not distressed; perplexed, but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed." Bruised and wounded, discomfited once and again, yet once and again he rallies; and stung with ingenuous shame and penetrated with wholesome regrets, he presses the more ardently forward, and will press forward until the prize is won, to which he is called by God from on high through Jesus Christ.

The ideas we have been considering, at least in their greatest vividness, belong most naturally to youth; — to the youth, I mean, of a mind, which, having been sheltered with the utmost care from evil influences, has been, at the same time, provided with such intellectual and moral nutriment, as is suited to its years. Such a mind has not become fettered by the tyrannous customs, or sophisticated by the maxims, of an artificial and imperfect state of society. There is a comparative closeness of sympathy between itself and that benign Spirit, who is the Life and Light of all things. Such a mind, therefore, swarms with images of excellence in every kind, and burns with the desire to give them outward form and feature. Wisely, therefore, said one of those clear Natures that make us rejoice in our Humanity, 'Tell him, when he is a man, to reverence the dreams of his youth.'

The worldling would stigmatize these dreams with the epithet romantic. But alas for the debasement of him, who can look back with shame on the time, when his heart

VOL. XIV. N. S. VOL. IX. NO. 1II.

38

was warm and unhackneyed, and his love a spring perpetually overflowing, and his hopes bright, and his mind full of the thoughts of all excellent deeds. Matter of triumph rather and grateful rejoicing should be the dreams of our youth. Nor this alone. They should be prophecies involving and insuring their own fulfilment. Counsel more solemn or more momentous can be addressed to no one, than that he take heed not to fall away from his early aspirations.

ow.

Let not the world cover thee with its cold, blighting shadHearken not to the sophistry, which would persuade thee to substitute expediency for right; smooth hypocrisy and fair-seeming equivocation for honesty and truth, cold prudence and unfeeling self-interest for frankness and freegushing love. Rely rather on thine own pure, spontaneous impulses, than on the narrow, frigid maxims of an unspiritual world. Let those images of truth and beauty, of good and right, which were the stars of thy youth, be the lightbeaming and warmth-diffusing suns of thy riper years. Work while it is yet day. With earnestness and perseverance, not disheartened by failure, not crushed by defeat, — strive to bring thy heart into harmony with whatsoever thy mind can conceive of universal excellence.

-

Thus strive thou till the end of life. And, thus striving, shalt thou accomplish the task assigned thee by thy Maker; and by His hand be crowned with "glory, honor, and immortality."

ART. III. Report on Punishment by Death. By Messrs. SULLIVAN of Boston, RANTOUL of Beverly, KENDALL of Boston, HOLDEN of Charlestown, and DAVIS of Boston, a Committee of the House of Representatives. June 9, 1831.

THE Marquis Beccaria published, in 1767, his admirable essay on Crimes and Punishments, in which he argues lucidly aad cogently against the justice and expediency of punishment by death. The Grand Duke of Tuscany was induced by the perusal of it to abolish this mode of punishment. And ever since, there has been, throughout the civilized world, a

constant progress of sentiment in favor of its abolition or infrequent infliction, a progress that has kept pace with the increase of intellectual light, with the advancement of science, with the improvement of public morals, and especially with the growth of religious knowledge, and of Christian faith and piety. The doctrine, that the legal destruction of human life is unnecessary and impolitic, has sprung up and gained ground under a light, before which antiquated errors of all kinds are disappearing. In the present age of intelligence, virtue, and philanthropy, it is maintained by many among the wisest and best of men. Whether their views are sound and well-based, it is our present purpose to inquire.

We are willing to concede at the outset, that civil government has a right to inflict capital punishment, if the public good demand it; and to rest our decision wholly on the question of expediency. In discussing this subject we shall, first, inquire, whether it be expedient to punish capitally aggressions upon property, such as arson, robbery, and the like; secondly, whether it be expedient to punish murder capitally; and, lastly, whether, if we reply negatively to the two first questions, there be any case in which it is expedient to inflict capital punishment.

I. Is it expedient to punish capitally mere aggressions upon property?

Laws, themselves the expression of public opinion, as long as they are in force, exert an influence upon it. The fact that a legislative provision attaches the same penalty to several different crimes, tends to place those crimes on the same footing in the public mind. We appeal to our readers for the truth of this remark; and ask them whether they have not looked upon the house-breaker, the highway robber, and the incendiary, with the same horror and loathing that they have felt for the murderer. Yet we doubt not that many a man has robbed, who would not at the moment have committed murder, even to save himself from the gallows, that many a man has been led by a deep sense of injury to fire his neighbour's dwelling, who would be among the first to rescue its occupants from the blazing ruins. But not only do the virtuous part of the community class crimes as the law classes them. That the viciously disposed make the same classification every one's own ob

servation will evince. There is a large class of people among us, who are habitually guilty of intoxication, quarrelling, and petty thieving, for which they are periodically committed to the almshouse or the county jail. They compass all the minor arts of iniquity; but never dare to go beyond them to crimes which would subject them to a higher penalty. Then there are those who break stores, steal horses, and commit crimes of that class so frequently as to spend about half their time in the state-prison; but who, though initiated in the whole circle of the crimes that send one thither, never commit a higher offence. And he who has passed this goal, who has once committed, without detection or conviction, an offence which would expose him to capital punishment,- seldom stops short of murder. For he finds that he has incurred the highest penalty that society can inflict, that he has committed a crime which legislative wisdom has classed with murder; and be therefore deems it little better than murder, and easily nerves himself, when tempted by cupidity or revenge, to take the life of his fellow. It should then be the policy of government to graduate punishment according to the different degrees of heinousness attached to different crimes.

Justice, too, demands a similar graduation of punishment. The criminal has rights as well as the injured party and the community; and the latter invade his rights when they inflict on him a punishment altogether disproportioned to the offence. Now, what proportion is there between the loss of a purse or a dwelling-house and the loss of life? Or what justice is there in punishing an injury, which in some cases is hardly felt and in most may be easily repaired, by inflicting an irreparable injury, by cutting off the offender's probationary existence, and sending him, without opportunity for reformation, to his Maker's tribunal?

Again, the public safety requires that aggressions upon property, not attended by murder, should be punished by some slighter penalty than that annexed to murder. If a man robs on the highway or enters a dwelling-house by night, having about him a weapon capable of producing death, he is, by our laws, liable to capital punishment. Now he may rob or commit burglary with or without committing murder. If he fail to commit murder, he leaves alive the principal witness or witnesses against him, and thus renders

If

his apprehension and condemnation the more certain. he kills the man whom he robs, or the inmates of the house which he enters, he puts out of the way the principal witness or witnesses against him, thus greatly dimini-hes the chance of his detection, and, in case of conviction, is liable to no greater penalty than if he had spared the life of his victim. So also, in case a man, while in the act of setting fire to a dwelling-house, should meet a spy, it would be for his interest to put so troublesome a witness out of the way. Thus our laws encourage murder, - offer a premium upon murder. Whereas, if aggressions upon property, unaccompanied by murder, were punished less severely than murder itself is, they would in almost every instance be unaccompanied by murder.

66

To show that the laws, as they now stand in this and other states, encourage murder in fact as well as in theory, we will quote a few sentences from the confession of the celebrated pirate, Charles Gibbs, made to Justice Hopson, at New-York, a little more than two years ago. The question was asked: Gibbs, why were you so cruel as to kill so many persons, when you had got all their money, which was all you wanted?' He replied: "The laws are the cause of so many murders." He was again asked: can that be? What do you mean ? His answer was: "Because a man has to suffer death for piracy; and the punishment for murder is no more. Then, you know, the dead tell no tales. But I am sure that, if the punishment for murder and piracy were different, there would not be so many murders."

"How

be more fre-
What is the
Better have
The

But it may be said, that, if slighter penalties be annexed to burglary, robbery, and the like, they will quently committed. Then let them be so. loss of property compared with that of life? ten robberies without murder than one with murder. property stolen may be recovered or replaced. shed cannot be gathered up, -the lost life cannot be restored to the community, to friends, to duty, to probation.

The blood

But these crimes would not be more frequently committed, were a lighter penalty annexed to them; for the certainty of punishment would be increased, in proportion as its severity was diminished. In England, there are no less than a hundred and sixty offences punishable by death. But,