“It is sufficient for the argument of the advocates of abolition of capital punishment to show that the suppression of the barbarous exhibitions of the scaffold would not necessarily cause an increase of heinous offences; for if the amount of crime were to remain the same under laws non-capital as under those which are capital, to prefer the latter to the former would evince a passion for the wanton and unavailing destruction of human life, unspeakably disgraceful to the Government or Legislature of any civilized country.
“In Derbyshire, in the year 1835, we find a similar result following a commutation of sentence for murder to that which followed a similar commutation in the county of Stafford in the preceding year; namely, the same number of commitments for murder in the year following the commutation as in that in which it occurred,—being two in each; thus, also, in this instance, there was neither increase nor diminution of the crime of murder in the year following that of the commutation, judging from the number of commitments.
“In Warwickshire, in the year 1835, the sentence of a convict for murder was commuted, the number of commitments for the crime in that year being five, whereas in the year following there was but one commitment. In this instance, then, we have not only no increase of the crime of murder, but an actual diminution amounting to four.
“In Westmoreland, in the year 1835, there was one commutation; and the commitments in the year following showed neither an increase nor diminution, being two in each.
“In Cheshire, in the year 1836, the sentences of two convicts for murder were commuted, the commitments for the crime in that year being two; the commitments for the year following were also two, showing neither an increase nor diminution.
“Here we have an instance where the sentences of all convicted were commuted, and no increase of the crime followed.
“In Devonshire, in the year 1836, there was one commutation of sentence for murder, the commitments being four. In the year following there were no commitments, making a decrease of four.
“In Lancashire, in the year 1836, the sentences of four convicts for murder were commuted, the number of commitments in the same year being seven. In the year following the number of commitments was one, making a decrease of six.
“In the county of Norfolk, in the year 1836, the sentences of five convicts for murder were commuted, the number of commitments for the same year being eight. In the following year the number of commitments for murder were but five, giving a decrease of three.
“In the counties of Norfolk, Nottingham, and Stafford, in the year 1837, there was one commutation of the sentence of murder for each respectively. The result was a fall in the committals of the following year from five to two in the first county,—giving a decrease of three; in the second county a fall from one to none; in the third county neither an increase nor diminution,—the number of committals having been three in each year.