not arise from some existing uncertainty as to the execution of the Law; either because the guilty may with great probability hope to remain undiscovered, or because the course of Justice and of Judicial Inquiry and Evidence is intricate and obscure, and presents many opportunities of escape. In this case, the subject of temptation might thus argue with himself:—‘Ten others, or more perhaps around me, have done this thing and go unpunished; why should I, the eleventh, be discovered?’—or thus: ‘I myself have done this thing already ten times; let me venture it again this eleventh time. Should I unfortunately be discovered, I have already the gain of ten to set against the loss of one;’—and no exception could be taken to this mode of reckoning. In the first case, the probability of no accusation being made would indicate a want of strict surveillance despite the good Legislation; in the second case, the hope of escaping conviction, even should an accusation take place, would indicate a deficiency in the requisite number of acute and sharp-sighted judges. In both cases, our next task would be to discover the cause of this deficiency; for example,—whether it did not arise out of the necessity which we have already described of the State employing all its powers directly for its outward protection; and whether such a State, were the augmentation of its Police or the improvement of its system of Judicial Inquiry demanded of it, would not be forced to lament its inability to provide the means for the accomplishment of these purposes. In this case, it would be necessary to represent to such a Government that inward security and strength is yet more important than outward, and that the former is the firmest foundation for the latter; that the means for the attainment of the former must first be provided, before there should be any question of the latter condition: and should we not dare to make these representations to the State, and were still less able to enforce our views upon its attention, it were at least
