they are wont to
entertain, suppressed all clamorous exultation, and prepared to enjoy the scene
of retaliation in triumph, silent and decent, though stern and relentless. It
seemed as if the depth of their hatred to the unfortunate criminal scorned to
display itself in anything resembling the more noisy current of their ordinary
feelings. Had a stranger consulted only the evidence of his ears, he might have
supposed that so vast a multitude were assembled for some purpose which affected
them with the deepest sorrow, and stilled those noises which, on all ordinary
occasions, arise from such a concourse; but if he had gazed upon their faces, he
would have been instantly undeceived. The compressed lip, the bent brow, the
stern and flashing eye of almost everyone on whom he looked, conveyed the
expression of men come to glut their sight with triumphant revenge. It is
probable that the appearance of the criminal might have somewhat changed the
temper of the populace in his favour, and that they might in the moment of death
have forgiven the man against whom their resentment had been so fiercely heated.
It had, however, been destined, that the mutability of their sentiments was not
to be exposed to this trial.
    The usual hour for producing the criminal had been past for many minutes,
yet the spectators observed no symptom of his appearance. »Would they venture to
defraud public justice?« was the question which men began anxiously to ask at
each other. The first answer in every case was bold and positive, - »They dare
not.« But when the point was further canvassed, other opinions were entertained,
and various causes of doubt were suggested. Porteous had been a favourite
officer of the magistracy of the city, which, being a numerous and fluctuating
body, requires for its support a degree of energy in its functionaries, which
the individuals who compose it cannot at all times alike be supposed to possess
in their own persons. It was remembered, that in the Information for Porteous
(the paper, namely, in which his case was stated to the Judges of the criminal
court), he had been described by his counsel as the person on whom the
magistrates chiefly relied in all emergencies of uncommon difficulty. It was
argued, too, that his conduct, on the unhappy occasion of Wilson's execution,
was capable of being attributed to an imprudent excess of zeal in the execution
of his duty, a motive for which those under whose authority he acted might be
supposed to have great sympathy. And as these considerations might move the
magistrates to make a favourable representation of Porteous's case, there were