the skins of animals so prepared as to render them proper for being written upon, or used in covering books. The skins of most animals are adapted to the manufacture, but as the better kinds are used in making leather, sheep-skins are preferred. The finer kind of parchment, known as velutum, is from the skins of calves, kids, and dead-born lambs. The stout parchment of drum-heads is from the skin of the wolf; although that of the ass or calf is sometimes used; the parchment of battle-fores is from the skin of the ass; and that used for sieves from the skin of the bo-goat.

The word parchment comes from the Latin pergamenæ, the ancient name of this manufacture, which is said to have been taken from the city of Pergamus. Eumenes, the king of that place (who reigned B.C. 197-159), has the honour of the invention; although, in reality, that prince appears rather to have been the improver than the inventor of parchment. According to Diodorus, the Persians of old wrote all their records on skins; and the ancient Ionians, as we learn from Herodotus, made use of sheep and goat skins in writing many ages before the time of Eumenes. Nor need we doubt that such skins were dressed for the purpose after a manner not unlike that in which our parchment is prepared, though probably not so artificially.

The manufacture of parchment is begun by the skinner, and finished by the parchment-maker. The skin having been stripped of its wool and placed in the lime-pit, the skinner stretches it on a wooden frame, called a kerse, consisting of four bars perforated with holes, in each of which is a peg. Pieces of twine, extending from the edges of the skin to the pegs, retain the skin in an extended state, in which the skinner pares it with a knife, called, from its shape, a half-moon knife. This being done, it is moistened with a rag; and powdered chalk being spread over it on the flesh side, the skinner takes a large pumice-stone, flat at the bottom, rubs over the skin, and thus scours off the flesh: this is called grinding. He then goes over it again with the knife, moistens it as before, and rubs it again with the pumice-stone without any chalk underneath, by which means the flesh side is considerably smoothed and softened. He then again passes the knife over it, which is called draining. The flesh side being thus drained, by scraping off the moisture, he in the same manner passes the knife over the grain side, and then scrapes the flesh side again. This finishes the draining; and the more it is drained, the whiter it becomes. The skinner now throws on more chalk, sweeping it over with a piece of lamb-skin which has the wool on; and this smooths it still farther. It is then left to dry, and when dried, taken off the frame by cutting it all round. The skin, being thus far prepared by the skinner, is taken out of his hands by the parchment-maker, who first, whilst it is dry, pares it on a summer, or calf-skin stretched in a frame, with a sharper instrument than that used by the skinner; and, working with the arm from the top to the bottom of the skin, takes away about one-half of its thickness. The skin, being thus equally pared on the grain side, is again rendered smooth by being rubbed with the pumice-stone on a bench covered with a sack stuffed with flocks, which leaves the parchment in a condition fit for writing upon. Should any small holes appear in the skin, they are stopped by cutting the edges thin and laying on small pieces of parchment with gum-water. The parchings taken off the skins are used in making glue, size, and the like.

The green parchment used in book-binding is coloured by means of verdigris, for which purpose thirty parts of crystallized verdigris, and eight parts of cream of tartar, are boiled in 500 parts of distilled water; when the solution is cold, four parts of nitric acid are added. The parchment is moistened with a brush; the colour is spread evenly over it; and, when dry, polish is given by means of white of egg or gum-arabic.

PARDON, in Criminal Law, is the remitting or forgiving an offence committed against the king.

Law, says Beccaria, cannot be framed on principles of compassion to guilt; yet justice, by the constitution of England, is bound to be administered in mercy. This is promised by the king in his coronation oath; and it is that act of his government which is the most personal and most entirely his own. The king condemns no man; that unpleasant task he leaves to his courts of justice; the great operation of his sceptre is mercy. His power of pardoning was said by the Saxons to be derived a lege sue dignitatis; and it is declared in Parliament, by stat. 27 Henry VIII., c. 24, that no other person has power to pardon or remit any treason or felonies whatsoever, but that the king has the whole and sole power thereof, united and knit to the imperial crown of this realm.

It is impossible to lay down any abstract rules for the administration of mercy. Each case must be judged of according to its own circumstances.

That human nature is such as in the aggregate to need control, no one who is acquainted with it will deny; and there appears to be no other method of controlling mankind but by general laws; but then, through the natural imperfection of human affairs, they may be cruel in one case while they are just in another. Cases may likewise occur where the sentence of the law, without its execution, will answer every purpose which could be expected from it, and where the execution of it would be extreme cruelty, although it might in strict language be called justice, because in conformity with the letter of the law.

Yet though such cases may and do often occur, it would be absurd to abolish any of those laws which the security of civil society has required; and therefore the only mode of regulating their operation in criminal matters seems to be the system of absolute or conditional pardons.

It is possible to define a particular crime, and to annex a particular punishment to the commission of it; while the moral guilt of criminals may vary. The real guilt consists not in the external action, but in the motives which prompted to it. Definite law, however, cannot always make such distinctions; besides, after the sentence of the law is pronounced, circumstances may emerge which present the case in a very different aspect from what it previously bore. Then there are what may be called accidents of the case, which could not be previously defined. To particularize and define, in laying down a law, every mode of an action which imagination can conceive, or which experience has shown us may happen, is utterly impossible; and therefore it seems equitable that there should be a power vested somewhere to modify and control, or even to discharge altogether, the judgments of the law in criminal cases; and that power in this country is judicially vested in the sovereign in council, or in Parliament by acts of indemnity.

It is not exercised so as to affect the private rights of third parties; and therefore, though the manslayer may be pardoned, the private right of the next of kin to damages is not thereby prejudiced.