| OCR Text |
Show 386 Ac'rs RELATING Part 1H. whigs conviét a man of high treafon for adhering to king George E Juft as foon Seét. V. TO THE Commas. 387 would a jury of Bofionians have conviéted the Americans in the right to refilt, gnaczmgue made, they of conrfe are againfl: their being punifhed at all. the Mohawks of guilt for deflroying the But when it was already decided, that _ tea. a precedent is cited : the acquittal of cap- they {hould be punifhed,-and fuch was the opinion of the whole houfe :--when the only quellion was how they fhould be tain Pretton was urged in an addrefs to the punifhed, it is but (26751171 agerc to contend houfe againf't this very bill, as a proof that however it may feem, on a fuperlicial againfi: this, or that mode of punifhment, without attempting to point out a better. Suppofing it even erroneous,or criminal, to have adopted compullive meafures; yet to view, a little attention will convince us, urge that as a new crime, which was the There is furely a wide difference between abfolving iieceffary confequence of fuch a refolution once adopted, is but a piece of party difin- a man, who being charged with an ac": of genuity, eafier to be excufed than juf'tified. enmity, appears after all not to have committed it; and the deflrué'tion of a friend A difcriminating punifhment we have In difproof of this lal'c allertion, indeed, the due courfe of law held out rcdrefs for any injury fnl‘tained in America : but that the cafes are not parallel. for the very act, whereby he proved him- already feen could not be exercifed, becaufe In fuch a cafe it can hardly be cow- all convifiion of the guilty appeared im- poflible. A colleétive punifhment became therefore liecelTary ; that is, a punifhment that thofe who contend againlt which involves, to a certain degree at leal'c, felf a friend. ceived, collective punifhment can really mean any thing but univcrfal impunity :---thinking 3 the the innocent With the guilty. Cc2 Nor |
