The Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1860-09-06 00:00:00

THE DEATH PUNISHMENT.

THE clank of the hammer on bolt and beam
for the erection of the dismal scaffold resounds
from north to south, and from east to west. The
fatal beam casts its dark and dreadful shadow
over the land. We read again and again of the
solemn procession from the cell to the drop.
Another and another wretched criminal quivers
for a few minutes before the gaze of assembled
thousands. The grim executioner no sooner cuts
down one victim than he sets out again on his
detestable round from gaol to gaol to perform
his repulsive office on the condemned who await
his approach. His " professional" visits to our
own county have not been few nor far between ;
and the day after to-morrow will again witness
him at his hideous task ou the old corner of that
high dark wall at Kirkdale, where so many have
died at his hands. The frequency of dire murders
and of executions have not unnaturally given
renewed vitality to the question—Ought the death
punishment to be retained on the Statute Book; or
ought it to be abolished as unjustifiable and
inadequate for the prevention of capital crimes ?
As the question now presents itself it is not com-
plicated by the existence of any morbid feeling
of tenderness towards the atrocious criminals
who have recently suffered, or are about to. suffer,
the extreme penalty of the law. It is not pm-
tended that any of these cases have been attended
by circumstances of doubt or extenuation, calling
for the interposition of prerOgative to arrest the
law. It is certain that THOMAS GALLAGHER, Who
is to suffer death on Saturday, designedly and piti-
lessly murdered an unoffending wife and mother.
He might have struck the fatal blow under the
influence of a momentary frenzy, and have after-
wards repented of the deed, when fully aware of
its consequences. But no;" even after his appre-
hension he said to the police-officer, " He wished
to CHRIST he had finished her." The atrocious
cruelty of the crime, it is admitted in this and
in other recent cases, leaves it beyond question
that if the sentence of death is justifiable under
any circumstances, it has been well merited by such
convicts as WILLIAM YOUNGMAN and THOMAS
GALLAGHER. It is denied by some, however,
that capital punishment is the appropriate penalty
of murder ; and the appalling and increasing
frequency of the crime is-appealed to as proof
that the tcaffold has utterly'failed as an " institu-
tion " for the prevention of murder.
Those who feel desirous of coming to a satis-
factory conclusion on this important question,
must first determine for themselves how far the
question as to the propriety or impropriety of
capital punishments, ought to be mixed up with
or affected by the entirely distinct question of
prevention.. The gallows has not and never will,
we believe, prevent the recurrence of the awful
crime of murder. The first man born of woman
was a murderer : no age has been with Out its
stain; and while human nature remains what it
is, we fear it will ever and anon be found more
or less frequently in our criminal calendars. If the
propriety of this or any other penalty, therefore, is
to be tested and determined only by its power
entirely to prevent and extirpate the crime, every
scheme that may be propounded will be found
utterly inadequate. The reason is manifest. In deal-
ing judicially,with a murderer we handle only the
ripened fruit, and so, far, are not • called upon to
take cognisance of the tree that bore it. The law
seizes upon the effect while it ignores the .cause.
It is not the province of our criminal code to
remove the causes which produce the criminal;
but to deal with the individual criminal when he
has actually transgressed. The punishment has
reference chiefly to himself; and only indirectly
to society,—first, to prevent his repetition of the
offence and subsidiarily to frighten or deter
others criminally disposed, from committing the
same act. Thus we find that the connection
between the two distinct questions of prevention
and punishment is only indirect and subsi-
diary. No mere penalty, punishment, or retri-
bution will either reform the criminal, or remove
the producing cause of crime. The utmost
advantage that can be reaped, under the name of
prevention, consists in the restraint which may
be imposed on men's evil passions by anticipation
of the terrible severity of the punishment decreed
by the law against the convicted murderer. This
restraint can never be sufficiently powerful under
all circumstances to prevent crime, however ap-
palling the known penalty may be ; but it will
be more or less operative in proportion to the
amount of terror which that penalty is calculated
to inspire. If, under the severest and most appro-
priate punishment for murder, the crime continues
to abound, the explanation is to be found in the
aggravation of the general producing causes
of all crimes, and not in the impropriety
or, inefficiency of the penalty awarded. Does
not every instinct of our nature tell us that
the fear of death must exercise even on the
criminal mind the most powerful restraint from
the commission of murder. It may be all very
well to talk of the really heavier, because more
protracted, punishment of penal servitude for
life; but common sense and the most cursory
observation inform ns that it presents compara-
tively little terror. Without attempting to
enter into a detailed proof of this almost self
evident truth, we would point to the joiful
expressions of gratitude usually uttered by the
condemned on receiving commutation of the
sentence of death. The unrevealed miseries o
the hulks are counted as nothing when offered
as an alternative to a violent and
.ignominious
death at the hands of the common executioner.
There still remains the question how far the
law that takes away human life is justifiable
under any circumstanc.es. Will any of those
who deny the right of society to exact the penalty
of life tell us what law, natural or revealed, is
violated by condemning to immediate death such
an atrociouit wretch as WILLIAM YOTJNIaMAN—
the matricide and fratricide—the fourfold mur-
derer? Does not every conscience spurn the
idea of such a wretch being maintained even
in servitude through his whole life at the
public expense ? Upon what ground could
such an inhuman creature plead his right
to live, and also to be clothed, and fed,
and watched and cared for ? Does not society
owe it as a duty to itself, in mere defence, to
return the fatal blow which such miscreants un-
mercifully deal upon it, in the person of unoffend-
ing subjects whom it is bound to protect ? In
proportion as we value human life, is it not incum-
bent on unto effectually remove and destroy those
who have shoWn them Selves. incapable of respect-
ing it even when surrounded by the most sacred
associations ? Away then with mere plausible
humanitarianism and theeretical optimism. It
accords with every instinct
,of riaprp? and is
recorded in the laws of God and
,uum. that ‘.‘ Who-
so sheacieth nlstY's 1?).904, by man shall his blood
be shed."

The official gazette of Turin publishes a royal
decree notifying a considerable reduction in the
Piedmontese import duties on yarns, tissues, &c.,
of cotton, hemp, and other articles.
The Herald says the engagements of the 4th
of the month are considered to have been well
met, though' ;:epewals have been frequent to meet
the pressure of the
IPoix.ent, particularly in the
drapery trade.