Chapters from the Biblical Law. for the purpose, he claimed, of giving Overbury the appearance of ill health, and thus assisting in working on the compassion of the King. Although the contents of these powders were not proved, the theory used to explain them seems to be the most dam aging evidence in the case. In short, his explanation of his conduct was that he wished to keep Overbury out of the way until his marriage with the countess had been consummated, and, meanwhile, he desired to impress Overbury with his friendliness. Not until the lords were about to retire to consider their verdict did Somerset seem to gain self-possession enough to make a rational statement. "My lords," he con cluded, "before you go together I beseech you give me leave to recommend myself and cause unto you; as the King hath raised me to your degree so he hath now disposed me to your censures. This may be any of your own cases, and therefore I assure myself you will not take circumstances for evidence, for if you should the condition of a man's life were nothing."
CHAPTERS
FROM
493
After his conviction he wrote a long letter to the King, in the course of which he said with much force: "I fell rather for want of well defending than by the violence or force of any proofs; for I so far forsook myself and my cause as that it may be a question whether I was more condemned for that or for the matter itself." The King granted a pardon to the Earl and Countess, and in 1621 they were released from the Tower, under certain restrictions as to their future movements. The Countess died in 1632; the Earl lived until 1645. This affair led to another celebrated case. Sir John Hollis and Sir John Wentworth had attended Weston's execution, and had asked Weston whether he was really guilty, expressing a wish to pray with him. Hollb also stated that had he been on Weston's jury he would have doubted what to do. For this mild scepticism they were sum moned before the Star Chamber for "tra ducing public justice" (2 State Trials. 1022), and were fined one thousand marks and imprisoned one year.
THE
BIBLICAL
LAW.
BY DAVID WERNER AMRAM. THE CASE OF THE BLASPHEMER. AMONG very primitive people?, blas phemy as a crime is unknown. The g-ods are considered to be simply super human powers with superhuman attributes, but conducting their affairs very much like human beings. Any one, therefore, in such a state of society who offends the gods either by blasphemy or by robbing them of their sacrifices, or by desecrating their sanctuaries, is left to deal with them exclusively, and public law, so far as it exists, takes no cog nizance of the crime. But when a people has reached national estate and has a national
god, any offense against the deity becomes a national crime, equivalent in some respects to high treason. It is the national pride that is wounded when the national god is insulted, and it is the national property that is stolen when the sanctuaries are robbed or dese crated. In the earlier stages of society the gods were, so to speak, allowed to attend to their own affairs without interference from their human worshipers. If their sanctuaries were insulted, they were expected to smite the offender with their lightnings or with dis
