beneficial that many guilty persons should escape unpunished than
one innocent should suffer. The reason is, because it is of more
importance to the community that innocence should be protected than
it is that guilt should be punished; for guilt and crimes are so
frequent in the world that all of them cannot be punished; and many
times they happen in such a manner that it is not of much
consequence to the public whether they are punished or not. But when
innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, especially to
die, the subject will exclaim, "It is immaterial to me whether I
behave well or ill, for virtue itself is no security." And if such a
sentiment as this should take place in the mind of the subject,
there would be an end to all security whatsoever, I will read the
words of the law itself.

The rules I shall produce to you from Lord Chief-Justice Hale, whose
character as a lawyer, a man of learning and philosophy, and a
Christian, will be disputed by nobody living; one of the greatest
and best characters the English nation ever produced. His words are
these:--

(2 H. H. P. C.): _Tutius_ _semper_ _est_ _errare_, _in_
_acquietando_ _quam_ _in_ _puniendo_, _ex_ _parte_ _misericordiae_
_quam_ _ex_ _parte_ _justitiae_.--"It is always safer to err in
acquitting than punishing, on the part of mercy than the part of
justice."

The next is from the same authority, 305:--

_Tutius_ _erratur_ _ex_ _parte_ _mitiori_,--"It is always safer to
err on the milder side, the side of mercy."