TRIED BY THE HOUSE OF PEERS.

The circumstances of the assassination appeared so cruel and deliberate, that the people cried aloud for vengeance; and the government gave up the offender to the justice of his country. The lord-keeper Henley was appointed lord high-steward for the trial of earl Ferrers, and sat in state with all the peers and judges in Westminster-hall, which was for this purpose converted into a very august tribunal. On the sixteenth day of April the delinquent was brought from the Tower in a coach, attended by the major of the Tower, the gentleman-gaoler, the warders, and a detachment of the foot-guards. He was brought into court about ten; and the lord-steward with the peers taking their places, he was arraigned aloud in the midst of an infinite concourse of people, including many foreigners, who seemed wonderfully struck with the magnificence and solemnity of the tribunal. The murder was fully proved by unquestionable evidence; but the earl pleaded insanity of mind; and, in order to establish this plea, called many witnesses to attest his lunacy in a variety of instances, which seemed too plainly to indicate a disordered imagination: unfounded jealousy of plots and conspiracies, unconnected ravings, fits of musing, incoherent ejaculations, sudden starts of fury, denunciations of unprovoked revenge, frantic gesticulations, and a strange caprice of temper, were proved to have distinguished his conduct and deportment. It appeared that lunacy had been a family taint, and affected divers of his lordship’s relations; that a solicitor of reputation had renounced his business on the full persuasion of his being disordered in his brain; that long before this unhappy event, his nearest relations had deliberated upon the expediency of taking out a commission of lunacy against him, and were prevented by no other reason than the apprehension of being convicted of scandalum magnatum, should the jury find his lordship compos mentis: a circumstance which, in all probability, would have happened, inasmuch as the earl’s madness did not appear in his conversation, but in his conduct. A physician of eminence, whose practice was confined to persons labouring under this infirmity, declared that the particulars of the earl’s deportment and personal behaviour seemed to indicate lunacy. Indeed all his neighbours and acquaintances had long considered him as a madman; and a certain noble lord declared in the house of peers, when the bill of separation was on the carpet, that he looked upon him in the light of a maniac, and that if some effectual step was not taken to divest him of the power of doing mischief, he did not doubt but that one day they should have occasion to try him for murder. The lawyers, who managed the prosecution in behalf of the crown, endeavoured to invalidate the proofs of his lunacy, by observing that his lordship was never so much deprived of his reason but that he could distinguish between good and evil; that the murder he had committed was the effect of revenge for a conceived injury of some standing; that the malice was deliberate, and the plan artfully conducted; that immediately after the deed was perpetrated, the earl’s conversation and reasoning were cool and consistent, until he drank himself into a state of intoxication; that in the opinion of the greatest lawyers, no criminal can avail himself of the plea of lunacy, provided the crime was committed during a lucid interval; but his lordship, far from exhibiting any marks of insanity, had in the course of this trial displayed uncommon understanding and sagacity in examining the witnesses, and making many shrewd and pertinent observations on the evidence which was given. These sentiments were conformable to the opinion of the peers, who unanimously declared him guilty.—After all, in examining the vicious actions of a man who has betrayed manifest and manifold symptoms of insanity, it is not easy to distinguish those which are committed during the lucid interval. The suggestions of madness are often momentary and transient: the determinations of a lunatic, though generally rash and instantaneous, are sometimes the result of artful contrivance; but there is always an absurdity which is the criterion of the disease, either in the premises or conclusion. The earl, it is true, had formed a deliberate plan for the perpetration of the murder; but he had taken no precautions for his own safety or escape; and this neglect will the more plainly appear to have been the criterion of insanity, if we reflect that he justified what he had done as a meritorious action; and declared he would, upon Mr. Johnson’s death, surrender himself to the house of lords. Had he been impelled to this violence by a sudden gust of passion, it could not be expected that he should have taken any measure for his own preservation; but as it was the execution of a deliberate scheme, and his lordship was by no means defective in point of ingenuity, he might easily have contrived means for concealing the murder until he should have accomplished his escape; and, in our opinion, any other than a madman would either have taken some such measures, or formed some plan for the concealment of his own guilt. The design itself seems to have been rather an intended sacrifice to justice than a gratification of revenge. Neither do we think that the sanity of his mind was ascertained by the accuracy and deliberation with which he made his remarks, and examined the evidence at his trial. The influence of his frenzy might be past; though it was no sign of sound reason to supply the prosecutor with such an argument to his prejudice. Had his judgment been really unimpaired, he might have assumed the mask of lunacy for his own preservation. The trial was continued for two days; and on the third the lord-steward, after having made a short speech touching the heinous nature of the offence, pronounced the same sentence of death upon the earl which malefactors of the lowest class undergo: that from the Tower, in which he was imprisoned, he should, on the Monday following, be led to the common place of execution, there to be hanged by the neck, and his body be afterwards dissected and anatomized. This last part of the sentence seemed to shock the criminal extremely; he changed colour, his jaw quivered, and he appeared to be in great agitation; but during the remaining part of his life he behaved with surprising composure, and even unconcern. After he had received sentence, the lords, his judges, by virtue of a power vested in them, respited his execution for one month, that he might have time to settle his temporal and spiritual concerns. Before sentence was passed, the earl read a paper, in which he begged pardon of their lordships for the trouble he had given, as well as for having, against his own inclination, pleaded lunacy at the request of his friends. He thanked them for the candid trial with which he had been indulged, and entreated their lordships to recommend him to the king for mercy. He afterwards sent a letter to his majesty, remonstrating, that he was the representative of a very ancient and honourable family, which had been allied to the crown; and requesting that, if he could not be favoured with the species of death which in cases of treason distinguishes the nobleman from the plebeian, he might at least, out of consideration for his family, be allowed to suffer in the Tower, rather than at the common place of execution; but this indulgence was refused. From his return to the Tower to the day of his execution, he betrayed no mark of apprehension or impatience, but regulated his affairs with precision, and conversed without concern or restraint.