They are often mifled to conclude, that thofe principles must be juft for which men can die with fuch refignation and intrepi dity; and, from admiring the traitor's magnanimity, they are fometimes betrayed fo far as to approve the Treason.

Thus, these rigorous punishments counterwork their own intentions. They often make loyal fubjects, of tender feelings and weak judgments, prove traitors in their hearts; and difpofe them to adopt fenti ments from compaffion, which reafon bids

them abhor.

SECT. V.

Of the Laws of other Countries, ancient and modern, in Cafes of High Treafon.

IT must be confeffed, that the general cuftom of moft nations, both antient and modern, feems to authorize the practice of punishing Treafon and Rebellion with

death.

We

We do not read, however, that among the Egyptians either of them were capitally punished; indeed they are not fo much as mentioned by name.

It is likewife obfervable, that, by the Jewish Law, we do not find any punishment prescribed against the crime of Treafon or Rebellion.

Lord Coke indeed obferves, that all the feveral parts of the punishment in High Treafon are to be found in Holy Scripture; and he mentions the feveral inftances where each has been separately inflicted on different individuals; that Joab was drawn; Bithan hanged; Judas embowelled; Sheba, the fon of Bichri, beheaded, Baanan and Rechal quartered, &c.*

But his Lordship has not fhewn, nor is it fuppofed he could fhew, where thefe punishments have been inflicted fimul ac femel on a Traitor. Befides, examples might be brought from the Old Testament, to justify many practices which are now

happily exploded. The New Teftament, which is the pattern of Chriftian Duty, breathes another fpirit. Benevolence, Humanity, and Mercy, are the precepts of our Saviour and divine Lawgiver.

If we recur to the Athenian Laws, we shall find, that they also took no cognizance of Treafon or Rebellion as capital offences; on the contrary, it is only provided by those laws, that.

He fhall be denied burial within Attica, and his goods expofed to fale, who hath been convicted of perfidious behaviour to wards the ftate, or of facrilege. And, farther, that

He who hath betrayed his country, shall not enter into the borders of Attica.

Even during the ufurpation of Pifftratus, the tyranny of the Four Hundred, or the ufurpation of the Thirty, we do not find that Rebellion or Treafon were made capital offences by Law; though it must be confeffed, that none of them fcrupled to dispatch

1

dispatch those privately, who made head against their government, or, more properly, their tyranny.

In a ftate where the fyftem of government was fo equal and mild, fuch fevere Laws would have alarmed the people more than the exercise of actual tyranny.

Even in Rome, we do not find that there were any Laws against Treason and Rebellion in the days of their liberty; and when fuch Laws were made, they did not secure the state against the violent fhock of civil: commotions.

The Cornelia Lex, of which Cornelius Sylla, the dictator, was author, may be deemed the first of this kind. By this Law it was made Treafon,

To lead an army out of the province, or to engage in a war without fpecial orders:

For any one to ingratiate himself with the army, fo as to make them ready to ferve his particular interest:

To fpare or ranfom a commander of the enemy, when taken prifoner, or to pardon the captains of robbers and pirates:

Or for a Roman citizen to refide, without orders, at a foreign court.

The punishment of aqua et ignis interdictio, was affigned to be inflicted on those who should be convicted of any of those crimes.

Every one may perceive that this Law fpeaks the language of an ufurper. By this, every officer, who gained, or was maliciously represented as endeavouring to conciliate the good-will of his fellow-foldiers, might be convicted of Treason, and made a victim to the jealousy of the ruling tyrant.

The Lex Julia, of which Julius Cæfar was the author, ordained the punishment mentioned in the Lex Cornelia to be inflicted on all who were found guilty of the cri-. men de majeftate; whereas Sylla only confined it to the particular fpecies of offence therein fpecified.

We