1785) Essays ’7
should be punished with death, not only as an equal
punishment of the crime, but to prevent other murders,
 does it follow that I must approve of inflicting
the same punishment for a little invasion on my
property by theft? If I am not myself so barbarous,
so bloody-minded and revengeful, as to kill a fellowcreature
 for stealing from me fourteen shillings and
threepence, how can I approve of a law that does
it? Montesquieu, who was himself a judge, endeavors
 to impress other maxims. He must have known
what humane judges feel on such occasions, and
what the effects of those feelings; and, so far from
thinking that severe and excessive punishments prevent
 crimes, he asserts, as quoted by our French
writer, page 4, that—
“L’atrocité des loix en empéche I'exécution.
“Lorsque la peine est sans mesure, on est souvent
obligé de lui préférer I'impunité.
“La cause de tous les relachemens vient de Uimpunité
 des crimes, et non de la modération des peines.’’ =
It is said by those who know Europe generally,
that there are more thefts committed and punished
annually in England than in all the other nations
put together. If this be so, there must be a cause
or causes for such depravity in your common people.
May not one be the deficiency of justice and morality
in your national government, manifested in your op-“The
 atrocity of laws prevents their being executed.
“When the punishment is excessive, it is often found necessary to
prefer impunity.
“The cause of all the violations of the laws comes from the impunity
of crimes, and not from the moderation of the penalties.”

2c