noon he was unsupplied with food, and in this wretched dwelling was kept fifteen weeks, without any friend, not even his wife, being suffered to come near him. His own house, was, in the mean time, rifled by the officers of the high commissioned court, his wife and children treated by these ruffians with great bar barity, himself denied a copy of the commitment, and the Sheriffs of London refused to bail him at his wife's petition. At the end of fifteen weeks he was served with a subpoena. Heath, the Attorney General, on an assurance that he should come off well, extorted a confession from him that he was the author of the book: an information was immediately lodged against him in the Star Chamber by Heath. He confessed the writing of the book, but with no such intention as the information suggested. He pleaded that his aim was to remonstrate against certain grievances in church and state under which the people suffered, to the end that parliament might take them into consideration, and give such redress as might be for the honour of the king, the quiet of the people, and the peace of the church. This answer not being admitted as satisfactory, the following cruel sentence was by this tyrannical court pronounced against him, though sick and absent, viz.

"That he should pay a fine of ten thousand pounds to his majesty's use; and in respect that the defendant had heretofore entered into the ministry, and the court of Star Chamber did not use to inflict any corporal or ignominious punishment upon any person so long as they continued in orders, the court referred him to the high commission, there to be degraded of his ministry; that

done, for farther punishment and example to others, the delinquent to be brought to the pillory at Westminster (the court sitting,) and there whipped; after his whipping, to be set in the pillory for some convenient space; to have one of his ears cut off, his nose slit, and to be branded in the face with S. S., for a sower of sedition; then to be carried to the prison of the Fleet, and at some convenient time afterwards to be carried to the pillory, at Cheapside upon a market day, to be there likewise whipped, then set in the pillory, have his other ear cut off; and then be carried back to the prison of the Fleet, there to remain during life, unless his majesty be graciously pleased to pardon him.”

Such was the sentence; which, when it was pronounced, that inhuman wretch bishop Laud pulled off his cap, and gave God thanks for it.

This sentence was given at the end of Trinity term. It was not till Michaelmas term following after the degradation that it was put in execution.

On Friday, November the 16th, part of his sentence was put in execution in this manner: In the new palace yard at Westminster, in term time, he was severely whipped, then put in the pillory, where he had one of his ears cut off, one side of his nose slit, branded on the check, with a red hot iron, with the letters S. S; and afterwards carried back to the Fleet, to be kept in close custody. On that day sevennight, his sores upon his back, ears, nose, and face, not being cured, he was whipped again at the pillory in Cheapside, and there had the remainder of his sentence executed upon him, by cutting off the

other ear, slitting the other side of the nose, and branding the other cheek. Dr. Leighton, in his own account of this horrid execution, adds that the hangman was made half drunk, and enjoined to perform his office with ferocity; that he stood, after receiving the punishment of the lash, almost two hours in the pillory, exposed to frost and snow, and then suffered the rest; that, being with these miseries disabled from walking, he was denied the benefit of a coach, and carried back to prison by water, to the farther endangering his life.

The treatment and prosecution of Dr. Leighton were notoriously illegal and inhuman. The judgment passed against him was by an arbitrary court, whose jurisdiction was unconstitutional, in a manner created by the crown, and cherished as a never-failing engine of despotism. The tyranny it exerted outwent every example of former ages. It was the ready minister of vengeance to all who opposed the designs of Charles I, and entirely influenced in its conduct by the persecuting furious spirit of Laud. The sentence passed against the unhappy Leighton was directly contrary to the humane spirit of the British laws, and the single instance of such execrable barbarity would have disgraced the government of an absolute monarch.

Cruelty to Animals.

As cruelty should not be shewn towards the human species, neither should it be indulged towards the animal tribes. "I ever thought," says judge Hale," that there is a certain degree of justice due from man to the creatures, as from man to man; and that an excessive use of the VOL. III. G'

creature's labour is an injustice for which he must account. I have therefore always esteemed it as a part of my duty, and it has always been my practice to be merciful to my beasts; and upon the same account I have declined any cruelty to any of God's creatures, and as much as I could prevented it in others as a tyranny. I have abhorred those sports that consist in torturing them; and if any noxious creature must be destroyed, or creatures for food must be taken, it has been my practice to do it in a manner that may be with the least torture or cruelty; ever remembering, that though God has given us a dominion over his creatures, yet it is under a law of justice, prudence, and moderation, otherwise we should become tyrants and not lords over God's creatures; and therefore those things of this nature which others have practised as recreations, I have avoided as sins."

Children should be early prohibited from tormenting insects, lest it should degenerate into insensibility, and they become inattentive to every kind of suffering but their own. We find that the supreme court of judicature at Athens thought an instance of this sort not below its cognizance, and punished a boy for putting out the eyes of a poor bird that had unhappily fallen into his hands. And Mr. Locke informs us of a mother who permitted her children to have birds and insects, but rewarded or punished them as they treated them well or ill.

The following circumstance, it is said, occurred at Abo in Finland. A dog, who had been run over by a carriage, crawled to the door of a tanner in that town: the man's son, a boy of fifteen

years of age, first stoned, and then poured a vessel of boiling water upon the miserable animal. This act of diabolical cruelty was witnessed by one of the magistrates, who thought such barba-· rity deserved to be publicly noticed. He therefore informed the other magistrates, who unanimously agreed in condemning the boy to this punishment. He was imprisoned till the following market day; then, in the presence of all the people, he was conducted to the place of execution by an officer of justice, who read to him his sentence-" Inhuman young man, because you did not assist an animal who implored your assistance by its cries, and who derives being from the same God who gave you life; because you added to the torture of the agonizing beast, and murdered it, the council of this city have sentenced you to wear on your breast the name you deserve, and to receive fifty stripes." He then hung a black board round his neck, with this inscription, “ A savage and inhuman young man ;" and, after inflicting upon him twenty-five stripes, he proceeded- Inhuman young man, you have now felt a very small degree of the pain with which you torture a helpless animal in its hour of death. As you wish for mercy from that God who created all that live, learn humanity for the future." He then executed the remainder of the sentence.

r

There is no doubt but cruelties often exercised may become so customary, as to render the heart insensible. I was once (says a writer) passing through Moorfields with a young lady aged about nine or ten years, born and educated in Portugal, but in the Protestant faith; and, observing a large