transported for from seven to ten years, and
of those eight hundred and forty-seven were
so sentenced for simple acts of larceny. So
we see what sort of sentencing the Shallows
used to relish, and the great sweep lately made
upon the transportation system must, it is to
be feared, leave them as disconsolate as an
alderman after a waiter has run off with his
unfinished callipash and callipee.

Now, let us look under the surface, and
ascertain if we can how justice is justified in
these her ways. We take up an "Abstract
Return of Persons tried for Larceny at
Courts of Quarter Sessions for the Counties
of Berks, Dorset, Somerset, Southampton
(including the Isle of Wight), Sussex, and
Wiltshire, in the year eighteen hundred
and forty-nine." Here we read that in
the county of Berkshire four persons, for
thefts to the amount of eighteen and sixpence,
received transportation to the amount
of eight-and-twenty years; that in Dorsetshire
thirteen persons, for thefts to the
amount of sixty-one shillings and sixpence,
received transportation to the amount of one
hundred and twelve years; that in Wiltshire
seventeen persons, for thefts to the value of
four pounds and ninepence, received
transportation to the amount of one hundred and
thirty-two years; and again in Sussex eight
persons, for thefts to the aggregate amount
of fourteen shillings and sixpence, received
transportation to the amount of sixty-two
years, or the very great judicial bargain of
four years and five months of convict life for
the small sum of one shilling. Taking four
dozen cases out of this report, and reckoning
them up, we find that twelve pounds nine
shillings and a pennyworth of larceny got in
exchange three hundred and seventy-six years
of transportation.

But we are still dealing in generalities. It
is possible for a shilling to be stolen in a way
that is more absolutely wicked than some
other theft of fifty pounds. The robbers of
the widow's mite cannot be punished too
severely. Down we come, therefore, to
special cases; and, not to be partial, will quit
the south, and travel north to Yorkshire
for them, after we have turned a few more
abstract facts out of the Abstract Report now
in our hands. In Dorset, G. B. received ten
years' transportation for a shilling, T. C, ten
years'. In Wiltshire, W. N., convicted on
two charges—one for stealing property worth
two shillings, and the other for property
worth three—received seven years for the
two shillings, and ten for the three; so that
for five shillings he had seventeen years
of the public hospitality.

Now we will take a special note or two,
and observe what kind of larcenies they are
which have brought down these thunderbolts
from the Joves enthroned at Quarter Sessions.
At the Spring Sessions for the East Riding
of Yorkshire last year, George Ingram was
transported for ten years; he had stolen five
pigeons. At the Midsummer Sessions of the
same Riding, William Sanders was
transported for ten years; finding a dead sheep,
he had taken half of it. At the Norfolk
Quarter Sessions for March eighteen hundred
and fifty-three, William Flood was
transported for ten years; he had stolen a faggot.
At the same Sessions James Whip was
transported for ten years, as a man who had
received a coat, knowing it to be stolen, upon
the sole evidence of the thief himself, who
was the means of bringing him to justice.

At the Liverpool Borough Sessions, James
MacGovan effected a great bargain—the
wares of justice were in this case in fact given
away like so much bankrupt stock; he
obtained ten years' transportation for the sum
of threepence-halfpenny.

At the Norfolk Quarter Sessions, last
Midsummer, John Landimore for three successive
thefts of corn from the same owner, received
three successive sentences, and was
transported accordingly for the term of thirty
years. At the Leicester Borough Sessions
last June, William Barret got ten years for
tenpence. On the part of the justices, if we
regard them as the shop-keepers of law, this
must be considered very reckless trading.

Then, too, it is not fair trading. The very
same County Criminal Reports, out of which
we can pick forty-eight persons who had
stolen, in all, less than thirteen pounds, and
were therefore transported for three hundred
and seventy-six years, being on an average
seven or eight years per man, supply us also
with the cases of another set of forty-eight
prisoners who had stolen thirty times as much,
in all more than four hundred pounds, and
whose aggregate punishment was the mere
trifle of imprisonment for sixteen years, two
months and three days, being on an average
four or five months per man. All depends
on the temper, or the stomach, or the greater
or less degree of shallowness in the particular
cousin Shallow who may, in each case, be the
prevailing dignitary.

We will not confine ourselves to generalities
in making these comparisons. Let us take,
here again, some sample cases from the bushel
ready to our hand. At the Dorset Quarter
Sessions one November, a man, for a robbery
of eighty pounds, was sentenced to six months'
imprisonment. At the same Sessions, for the
same offence at Midsummer, another man
was sentenced to be transported for fourteen
years. J. D. was then sentenced to six
weeks' imprisonment for stealing ten pounds;
but, at the Epiphany Sessions, E. A., who stole
ten pounds, was imprisoned for two years.
At the Michaelmas Sessions, R. F., for stealing
property worth threepence, was sentenced to
imprisonment for one day, and S. B., an old
man of seventy, for a theft of the same
magnitude, was sentenced to imprisonment for
one year with hard labour.

At the Somerset Epiphany Sessions, eighteen
hundred and forty-nine, W. H., for a three-