culprits themselves who have been set at work by others to commit offences, but those only are so who set them to work. It is no more our inclination than our business here to discuss the abstract question of right and wrong; but, neither in this or on any other occasion, shall we refrain from maintaining what we conceive to be right through fear that we should possibly be wrong. Therefore, it is, we insist that Kelly and Spicer, the two boys, ordered for execution for having passed bad notes, are not guilty, morally (every one will allow), nor say we, are they guilty legally. For the youths would not have committed the crime imputed to them, but for the persuasions of Finney; that is very certain. And Finney again would have been most careful how he dealt in this sacrifice of human life,with which he meant to purchase impunity for his own forfeit life by the favour of Tom Limbrick,—had it not been for the well-known favour bestowed on Vaughan, Johnson, Brock, Pelham, and Power,[1] instead of those halters they
- ↑ Sir Samuel Sheppard (the Attorney General) avowed that they "deserved execution of their sentences." Debate on a motion for a copy of the opinion of the twelve judges, which the minister acknowledged did not exist.
