The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-05-03 00:00:00

PUNISHMENT OF DEATH.

MEETING FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE

PUNISHMENT OF DEATH.

Last
y.night a public meeting was held in the Teutonic-
ball' Lime-street, to originate a petition to Parliament in
favour
was of the abolition of capital punishment. The chair
othee°"lll3led by:William Rathbone, Esq. ; and among the
` gentlemen present were the Rev. Mr. Charming,
eierv'xr Robberds, Mr. J. B. Cook, Mr. John Smith,
ehard Rathbone, Rev. Hugh Stowell Brown, &c.
The meetingkr. was well attended.
or Dymond, secretary to the Society for the Abolition
pital Punishment, attended as a deputation.
bee e Chairman, in opening the proceedings, said that he
:i
haititgha eltf i
o fweli
feeirillever taken the chair on any occasion with a greater
1
responsibilityeng than on the present occasion, and
arose from the fact that the question
ther fe was to be discussed involved the life or death of
creatures. He was not prepared to say that
thehe 4,e°111(1 be convinced that the taking away the life of
see 11'4Y would preserve the life of the innocent he could
tra -PY it 1131 law or reason against it, but when, on the con-
had,
was his full belief that executions in England
deter -4e more to cause death and generate crime than to
hisfrom
the vice and wickedness, then he felt that it was
and (1-1 and his right to protest against them as injurious
Of the ernoralising. (Hear, hear.) Having thus disposed
the
ot question of expediency in the matter, he came to
of he:part of the subject, which was the punishment
haeeen:r'Eninal, and here he should say that he could
take 41," doubt whatever that it was not given to man to
h-Le judgment-seat of Ged-(hear, hear)-and that
IThee7n-a4(l no right to say that they could know the time
tee, the criminal should no longer have the chance of
eetitan
, -cc on this side of the grave. (Hear, hear.) In
ecleeiesi
diseu °ll, he hoped that they would on that night fully
none 84:the subject of capital punishment, than which
seepimportant could receive their consideration-
see irerilisecl to all who might address the meeting a fair
kr'lnPartial hearing.
Ile tIOPTIond then proceeded to address the meeting.
to ei.--ared that the great public question they had met
doion'e4ss, had nothing in it approaching to sectarian
I,B'r Fat.,lsal or to party strife. It had been advocated by
eteraceeroY Reiter a conservative, and by the late Joseph
been "}: ultra.ra'dical, in the House of Commons. It had
)tereiTth defended and denounced in pulpits. There
Deny
ego
classes of opponents with whom he had princ -
thelllat e:,,:leal-the theologian, who argued from scripture
eiertal punishment was not only lawful but right -
111°sonhic who argued in favour of capital p.unile-
Jostle," a great' and necessary act of retributive
ellartio-,,s,and the politician, who argued that certain
fro th-edlerlt_hisead other countries were only restrained
tioremehrrst 'omission of murder by the
.fear of the gallows.
of these classes founded their arguments prin.-
Neh,•') uPon the passage from the 9th chapter of Genesis,
be 040,4sheddeth man's blood, by:man shall his blood
to rem To this argument, Mr. Dymond proceeded
moral contending that this text was not uttered awsas
Prepareaw for all time. If the community at present
eireero to adopt that text as a law suited to the present
Whi!lances, they should adopt the whole of the chapter,
that (4;l° One ever thought of dohag. A text drawn from
Profe-sgaPter was used across the Atlantic by Christian
Text Wag s:ars as a justification for slavery. Another isolated
!I_tt iee,°lace used in England as a justification for burn-
uiltio;ren for witchcraft. There was scarcely any
412 is -1 sln which had not at some time been justified by
by tkolated text of scripture Scripture should be read
lesolain light of revelation-1 not of prejudice directed to
nth ;" Passages. The passage, too, was a doubtful one,
uletic's to the translation of the word " whosoever," and
;hat teer resPects. It was declared by many commentators
.t the „"° Passage was only prophetic. The meaning of
ovassaee was, then, far too doubtful to act upon
betea' an eternal moral law, where the lives of
sagest beings were concerned ; and many pss-
Is
Rue 11 Scripture showed that it had not been applied
eelaw even in Scriptural times. Further, h. e
at :4' that not even those who brought forward this
to pet gean argument for capital punishment, were willing
Its a " strictly into practice. If it were to be applied
alloy" at all, it must apply to every man who put
411egeer to death, whether it was what was usually
laude, wilful murder or not. The best people in the
Or nui.,“all frequently held up their hands for the repreive
death-y9/10 had killed others. They did not put men to
Wha -11.0 r manslaughter. They did not put men to death
blood al on their way to a throne, perhaps, throuehtthe
see4rof thousands-they received such men as gees s 7.
he the law was not applicable to them, how could it
oneeePileable to the miserable beings who had committed
Wereor two murdto`s. (Applause.) If that law
Ptie to be applied at all, it must be ap-
k according to the chapter of Genesis, to
yen other offences which it would be incon-
,ent sometimes, even to some of those who helped to
zi7te the laws, to punish by death. The speaker then
calied himself to the question of retributive punishment.
lied
point he denied that men had any right to take
lle an extreme power into their hands, or.that any man
than
eright to delegate such a power to society, any more
eee4 11,e had a right to commit society. He also pro-
tip.eu to point out the extremely uncertain character of
eeltal punishment, as regarded the justice of its applica-
', and the frequency with which. on direct as
.well as
eases evidence, innocent men, and
He
nsoamvee
see: insane men, were made to suffer death.
eeatrhasl instances in which men and women were Cpugt tos
stelae charged with murder, whose innocence wa
that 3,tentlY clearly established. He argued. also,
thel nature of the punishment, which was
thos'alne in all grades and degrees of murder, was
Ito 4uePrived of all value as an act of retributive justice.
Whet en nassed on to consider the practical question,
evaiiher the
use of capital punishment had been of any
Must inuiminishing crime. He argued that the contrary
eha,..e"", found to be the fact. Offences of a minor
lateXLer, such as forgery, highway robbery, and even
these 9, at one time punished by death, and yet
etllat offences were not diminished by the application of
`ereoe. punishment ; but, when the punishment was
and e'ed, the number of these offences began to decrease,
ofth"eM since decreased comparatively with the increan
41°Pulation. He quoted statistical evidence to pro
"lonat-e.t* At Liverpool, a short time since, a man named
„ 'lroat-' Ileywood, was hanged for cutting a woman's'oaasi" and at the next assizes, a man was convicted of
Inteeleallghter--who would have been convicted of
ottee-„sr, if the offence had not been capital-fpr an
oth'7 of the same character. This, and a variety of
meet instances he produced, to show that the employ-
frere reaeital punishment, so far from deterring others
effeet'clpruitting murder, was actually found to have the
ee°4l%,°:„,suggesting and originating, in many cases, the
Priacii;',l°ll of that crime. Taking a rapid glance at the
eaPitaial Countries in the world, and the history of
evieen- Punishment in each, he contended that the
e_Ppee,c,e, of every country bore out the fact, that the
r-re,lll,°ll of the punishment never had the effect of de-
Pee 70111 murder but on the contrary, tended to
atikee.7l,lt ; and that abolition of the punishment was
sPee'aulY followed by a diminution of the crime. In
191tatal, he dwelt upon the fact, that in America-a country
mena Ps'orle and Jurisprudence like our own-the expere•
ere albhere it had been tried, had been found successful.
natirr called attention to the fact, that the extreme
ur,ee-
r, 01 the punishment, rendered conviction vveryain, owing to the reluctance ofj arks to aid in putting
1111pr''.eitice a law which was abhorrent to their feelings.
raize-tatd these grounds, then, he appealed to th 2 meeting to
l)tie6e"ir voices for the abolition of the law of capita!
Nief„,lient• After an eloquent peroration, the speaker
ban -"ed his address, which occupied considerably more
eeeera,bour in delivery, and resumed his seat amid loud and
Nt 41 aTPPIatIBC.
Patlier.,"°hls Smith moved the adoption of a petition to
kent -e,nt) Praying for the abolition of the punish,.
ol death, and the substitution, in its place,
Dew- second but more certain description of
4)2nent, reldheers.) In the course of his address
of e(tnalerat,ad several instances to show the inefficiency
arhallital punishment as a deterring punishment, a-:d
tn,,i,;(l that as great crimes were generally perpetrated. to
1,41;_ll the necessity of work, the greatest punishment
could be inflicted on such criminals would be
lei"
labour for the natural term of their lives. With
'et
execution, the memory of their crime passed by, and
that memory the fear of a like fate for a like offence ;
t.l7kept for ever at the severest labour (and it could
.13' be provided), then, not only would the memory of
ele crime be kept fixed in the public mind, but the fearful
tea._
a rem, ple which they would afford of incessant toil without
'olopense, would assuredly deter those who resorted to
,!I?.e to avoid the law of labour imposed on all.
14 411. Richard Rathbone seconded the motion in an address
ettwaieh he contended that the prevention of crime could be
thaatted far better without the purashment of death, and
eroan was positively enjoined by the command of God,
tamk rmed by the life and practice of the Saviour, not to
4the life of man.
oe hr. John Joseph (who erose in the body of the ball, and,
on thing invited, came to the platform) opposed the motion,
alioee ground that there some men who should not be
to
trd to live, and that:, there was no way at present open
peei,lBP°se of some of their criminals except by capital
Woei;lltlent• He contended that no other punishment
k deter some persons from committing murder.
capita Barnes moved an amendment to the effect that
ne a:' Punishment was the only just and retributive, as well
Vowerinate means to repress capital crime, and disa-
yotioe all
e sympathy with those who expressed commisse-
seerd ""r Parties who had, by committing the crime of
tt,er, incurred the known penalty.
keet: ``incurred
Perry (as we understood) seconded the amend,-
at
60 The speaker argued in favour of capital punishment
lateellne length, amid considerable interruption, hisses,
12ats 'sr, and some applause. He referred to several
Pam ?sl in the New Testament, to shew that capital
Wellailment was enjoined by the Christian dispensation, as
s the Mosaic law, and argued, that if the laws were
the
Cr' -.gently enforced, and real murderers put to death,
Tilfliee of murder would be diminished in amount.
galled for, Hugh Stowell Brown was hee vociferously
for, and at last consented to comer forward, lig

41ure