to humanity, would not be hazarded in these times.—In all other criminal prosecutions, the jury decides upon the fact and the crime in one word, and the court pronounces a certain sentence, which is the sentence of the law, not of the judge. If Lord Mansfield's doctrine be received, the jury must either find a verdict of acquittal, contrary to evidence, (which, I can conceive, might be done by very conscientious men, rather than trust a fellow-creature to Lord Mansfield's mercy) or they must leave to the court two offices, never but in this instance united, of finding guilty, and awarding punishment.
But, says this honest Lord Chief Justice, "if the paper be not criminal, the defendant, (tho' found guilty by his peers) is in no danger, for he may move the court in arrest of judgment."—True, my good Lord, but who is to determine upon the motion?—Is not the court still to decide, whether judgment shall be entered up or not; and is not the defendant this way as effectually deprived of judgment by his peers, as if he were tried in a court of civil law, or in the chambers of the inquisition? It is you, my Lord, who then try the crime, not the jury.
