In Erewhon as in other countries there
are some courts of justice that deal with special
subjects. Misfortune generally, as I have above
explained, is considered more or less criminal, but
it admits of classification, and a court is assigned
to each of the main heads under which it can be supposed
to fall. Not very long after I had reached the
capital I strolled into the Personal Bereavement Court,
and was much both interested and pained by listening
to the trial of a man who was accused of having just
lost a wife to whom he had been tenderly attached,
and who had left him with three little children, of
whom the eldest was only three years old.
The defence which the prisoner’s
counsel endeavoured to establish was, that the prisoner
had never really loved his wife; but it broke down
completely, for the public prosecutor called witness
after witness who deposed to the fact that the couple
had been devoted to one another, and the prisoner
repeatedly wept as incidents were put in evidence that
reminded him of the irreparable nature of the loss
he had sustained. The jury returned a verdict
of guilty after very little deliberation, but recommended
the prisoner to mercy on the ground that he had but
recently insured his wife’s life for a considerable
sum, and might be deemed lucky inasmuch as he had
received the money without demur from the insurance
company, though he had only paid two premiums.
I have just said that the jury found
the prisoner guilty. When the judge passed sentence,
I was struck with the way in which the prisoner’s
counsel was rebuked for having referred to a work in
which the guilt of such misfortunes as the prisoner’s
was extenuated to a degree that roused the indignation
of the court.
“We shall have,” said
the judge, “these crude and subversionary books
from time to time until it is recognised as an axiom
of morality that luck is the only fit object of human
veneration. How far a man has any right to be
more lucky and hence more venerable than his neighbours,
is a point that always has been, and always will be,
settled proximately by a kind of higgling and haggling
of the market, and ultimately by brute force; but
however this may be, it stands to reason that no man
should be allowed to be unlucky to more than a very
moderate extent.”
Then, turning to the prisoner, the
judge continued:—“You have suffered
a great loss. Nature attaches a severe penalty
to such offences, and human law must emphasise the
decrees of nature. But for the recommendation
of the jury I should have given you six months’
hard labour. I will, however, commute your sentence
to one of three months, with the option of a fine
of twenty-five per cent. of the money you have received
from the insurance company.”
The prisoner thanked the judge, and
said that as he had no one to look after his children
if he was sent to prison, he would embrace the option
mercifully permitted him by his lordship, and pay the
sum he had named. He was then removed from the
dock.
The next case was that of a youth
barely arrived at man’s estate, who was charged
with having been swindled out of large property during
his minority by his guardian, who was also one of
his nearest relations. His father had been long
dead, and it was for this reason that his offence
came on for trial in the Personal Bereavement Court.
The lad, who was undefended, pleaded that he was
young, inexperienced, greatly in awe of his guardian,
and without independent professional advice.
“Young man,” said the judge sternly, “do
not talk nonsense. People have no right to be
young, inexperienced, greatly in awe of their guardians,
and without independent professional advice.
If by such indiscretions they outrage the moral sense
of their friends, they must expect to suffer accordingly.”
He then ordered the prisoner to apologise to his guardian,
and to receive twelve strokes with a cat-of-nine-tails.
But I shall perhaps best convey to
the reader an idea of the entire perversion of thought
which exists among this extraordinary people, by describing
the public trial of a man who was accused of pulmonary
consumption—an offence which was punished
with death until quite recently. It did not
occur till I had been some months in the country,
and I am deviating from chronological order in giving
it here; but I had perhaps better do so in order that
I may exhaust this subject before proceeding to others.
Moreover I should never come to an end were I to
keep to a strictly narrative form, and detail the infinite
absurdities with which I daily came in contact.
The prisoner was placed in the dock,
and the jury were sworn much as in Europe; almost
all our own modes of procedure were reproduced, even
to the requiring the prisoner to plead guilty or not
guilty. He pleaded not guilty, and the case
proceeded. The evidence for the prosecution was
very strong; but I must do the court the justice to
observe that the trial was absolutely impartial.
Counsel for the prisoner was allowed to urge everything
that could be said in his defence: the line taken
was that the prisoner was simulating consumption in
order to defraud an insurance company, from which
he was about to buy an annuity, and that he hoped
thus to obtain it on more advantageous terms.
If this could have been shown to be the case he would
have escaped a criminal prosecution, and been sent
to a hospital as for a moral ailment. The view,
however, was one which could not be reasonably sustained,
in spite of all the ingenuity and eloquence of one
of the most celebrated advocates of the country.
The case was only too clear, for the prisoner was
almost at the point of death, and it was astonishing
that he had not been tried and convicted long previously.
His coughing was incessant during the whole trial,
and it was all that the two jailors in charge of him
could do to keep him on his legs until it was over.
The summing up of the judge was admirable.
He dwelt upon every point that could be construed
in favour of the prisoner, but as he proceeded it
became clear that the evidence was too convincing to
admit of doubt, and there was but one opinion in the
court as to the impending verdict when the jury retired
from the box. They were absent for about ten
minutes, and on their return the foreman pronounced
the prisoner guilty. There was a faint murmur
of applause, but it was instantly repressed.
The judge then proceeded to pronounce sentence in
words which I can never forget, and which I copied
out into a note-book next day from the report that
was published in the leading newspaper. I must
condense it somewhat, and nothing which I could say
would give more than a faint idea of the solemn, not
to say majestic, severity with which it was delivered.
The sentence was as follows:-
“Prisoner at the bar, you have
been accused of the great crime of labouring under
pulmonary consumption, and after an impartial trial
before a jury of your countrymen, you have been found
guilty. Against the justice of the verdict I
can say nothing: the evidence against you was
conclusive, and it only remains for me to pass such
a sentence upon you, as shall satisfy the ends of
the law. That sentence must be a very severe
one. It pains me much to see one who is yet so
young, and whose prospects in life were otherwise
so excellent, brought to this distressing condition
by a constitution which I can only regard as radically
vicious; but yours is no case for compassion:
this is not your first offence: you have led
a career of crime, and have only profited by the leniency
shown you upon past occasions, to offend yet more seriously
against the laws and institutions of your country.
You were convicted of aggravated bronchitis last
year: and I find that though you are now only
twenty-three years old, you have been imprisoned on
no less than fourteen occasions for illnesses of a
more or less hateful character; in fact, it is not
too much to say that you have spent the greater part
of your life in a jail.
“It is all very well for you
to say that you came of unhealthy parents, and had
a severe accident in your childhood which permanently
undermined your constitution; excuses such as these
are the ordinary refuge of the criminal; but they
cannot for one moment be listened to by the ear of
justice. I am not here to enter upon curious
metaphysical questions as to the origin of this or
that—questions to which there would be no
end were their introduction once tolerated, and which
would result in throwing the only guilt on the tissues
of the primordial cell, or on the elementary gases.
There is no question of how you came to be wicked,
but only this—namely, are you wicked or
not? This has been decided in the affirmative,
neither can I hesitate for a single moment to say that
it has been decided justly. You are a bad and
dangerous person, and stand branded in the eyes of
your fellow-countrymen with one of the most heinous
known offences.
“It is not my business to justify
the law: the law may in some cases have its inevitable
hardships, and I may feel regret at times that I have
not the option of passing a less severe sentence than
I am compelled to do. But yours is no such case;
on the contrary, had not the capital punishment for
consumption been abolished, I should certainly inflict
it now.
“It is intolerable that an example
of such terrible enormity should be allowed to go
at large unpunished. Your presence in the society
of respectable people would lead the less able-bodied
to think more lightly of all forms of illness; neither
can it be permitted that you should have the chance
of corrupting unborn beings who might hereafter pester
you. The unborn must not be allowed to come near
you: and this not so much for their protection
(for they are our natural enemies), as for our own;
for since they will not be utterly gainsaid, it must
be seen to that they shall be quartered upon those
who are least likely to corrupt them.
“But independently of this consideration,
and independently of the physical guilt which attaches
itself to a crime so great as yours, there is yet
another reason why we should be unable to show you
mercy, even if we were inclined to do so. I
refer to the existence of a class of men who lie hidden
among us, and who are called physicians. Were
the severity of the law or the current feeling of
the country to be relaxed never so slightly, these
abandoned persons, who are now compelled to practise
secretly and who can be consulted only at the greatest
risk, would become frequent visitors in every household;
their organisation and their intimate acquaintance
with all family secrets would give them a power, both
social and political, which nothing could resist.
The head of the household would become subordinate
to the family doctor, who would interfere between
man and wife, between master and servant, until the
doctors should be the only depositaries of power in
the nation, and have all that we hold precious at
their mercy. A time of universal dephysicalisation
would ensue; medicine-vendors of all kinds would abound
in our streets and advertise in all our newspapers.
There is one remedy for this, and one only.
It is that which the laws of this country have long
received and acted upon, and consists in the sternest
repression of all diseases whatsoever, as soon as
their existence is made manifest to the eye of the
law. Would that that eye were far more piercing
than it is.
“But I will enlarge no further
upon things that are themselves so obvious.
You may say that it is not your fault. The answer
is ready enough at hand, and it amounts to this—that
if you had been born of healthy and well-to-do parents,
and been well taken care of when you were a child,
you would never have offended against the laws of your
country, nor found yourself in your present disgraceful
position. If you tell me that you had no hand
in your parentage and education, and that it is therefore
unjust to lay these things to your charge, I answer
that whether your being in a consumption is your fault
or no, it is a fault in you, and it is my duty to
see that against such faults as this the commonwealth
shall be protected. You may say that it is your
misfortune to be criminal; I answer that it is your
crime to be unfortunate.
“Lastly, I should point out
that even though the jury had acquitted you—a
supposition that I cannot seriously entertain—I
should have felt it my duty to inflict a sentence
hardly less severe than that which I must pass at
present; for the more you had been found guiltless
of the crime imputed to you, the more you would have
been found guilty of one hardly less heinous—I
mean the crime of having been maligned unjustly.
“I do not hesitate therefore
to sentence you to imprisonment, with hard labour,
for the rest of your miserable existence. During
that period I would earnestly entreat you to repent
of the wrongs you have done already, and to entirely
reform the constitution of your whole body. I
entertain but little hope that you will pay attention
to my advice; you are already far too abandoned.
Did it rest with myself, I should add nothing in
mitigation of the sentence which I have passed, but
it is the merciful provision of the law that even
the most hardened criminal shall be allowed some one
of the three official remedies, which is to be prescribed
at the time of his conviction. I shall therefore
order that you receive two tablespoonfuls of castor
oil daily, until the pleasure of the court be further
known.”
When the sentence was concluded the
prisoner acknowledged in a few scarcely audible words
that he was justly punished, and that he had had a
fair trial. He was then removed to the prison
from which he was never to return. There was
a second attempt at applause when the judge had finished
speaking, but as before it was at once repressed; and
though the feeling of the court was strongly against
the prisoner, there was no show of any violence against
him, if one may except a little hooting from the bystanders
when he was being removed in the prisoners’ van.
Indeed, nothing struck me more during my whole sojourn
in the country, than the general respect for law and
order.