The Sun.
London, England, 1847-03-10 00:00:00

capital punishment was altogether done tie with.
The punishment of death had been abolislisal on that
country in 1834, hut in 1835 some wise philosopher
conceived that it was again necessary to inflict the
capital punishment for the sake of setting an example
capital puniuhments were, therefore, revived, and wbat
was the result ? Why, that the crimes which in the
years 1830 to 1834 had been. oely corn m tted by 60
had risen in the years 'succeeding the revival of the
punishment of death (1" 80 or somewhat like 25 per cent.
He therefore thought, that this was a strong argument
to show that that • ;
punisement was not necessary. Ile
persons,
thought that th.e present improved system of Prisc!r/
discipline, the I.arger army of police kept up, not only is
the towns hu's in the rural districts, and the extended
education Ythich was granted to all classes, were the
best seFo:rities for the due observance of the law:
It was incumbent on them to prove that the punishmen°
of death was necessary, rather than for him to Pr(lve
that it was unnecessary. He was, however, prepared to,
prove that the punishment of death was not only n°l'.
necessary, but was positively injurious to the criminal,
the jury who tried the case, and the public who wl,.
nessed the execution. The first object of all punig't
ment should be to insure its certainty. At Presebil.
there was no certainty in the infliction of the punisto
'ant of death ; the criminal felt that it "his
uncertain, and this uncertainty encouraged in ,
mind a species of moral gambling, and induced n;
to stake his existence against tho severity of the law` n
Another cause of the uncertainty attending the Pres!
law was, the badly defined legal acceptation of the crime
.0
of murder; it depended upon the proof of the,crtihinr
having been committed with malice prepense. wile'iiee
the criminal was or was not convicted ; and this nla'a,
prepense was judged of according to various stall:he
by the different judges who tried the case.
consequence of all this was, to encourage uncertaintye:
and that uncertainly would not fail to encourage crime
The magnitude of the punishment created a
the
heroism, but its great objection was, that it lot;
criminal unreformed, and sent him to his last account
" Unabsolved, unannealed, with all
Hit imperfections on his head."
The existence of this punishment enfeebles the decision
of their tribunals, for the magnitude of the punishni eng
the.
threw the crime into the shade. The decisions °I.
jury ought to be clear anddistinct, and not overshadowed
by the magnitude of the penalty imposed by the Ist
But what was the effect upon the public—the publiel;
whom they ought first of all to look—the public lee
whose sake it was said that capital punishments wer
to be continued as an example ? Why, if e;
pital punishment was to be continued, should tie'
not make it a solemn, a serious ceremony? why not 1„/li
vest it with all the dignity of decorum ? But, instelt.
of that, it was carried out hurriedly, at an early
hour of the morning, and had no salutary eneerd
But what was the glorious example it was
their
to inculcate ? Would they wish any of °I:el
relatives, any of their children, to witness an excecul
with the view of inculcating a deep moral lesson
What father would take his children to witness such!?
exhibition ? None. Yet they held that such exhiuiv
tions were for the public good ; but were the pe°l)e
whom they ought to do all in their power to elevate, tn;
stead of debasing and demoralizing, to be allowed longe
to witness such sanguinary spectacles, and to have their
natures thereby perverted and hardened ? What'
s ml
would ask, was the effect of an exhibition upon the croWici,
who witnessed it ? It was expected, as he had ,15„„.
to do good ; but they left it with auh".„e-t;
rence and disgust. And mon, it had "-
proved—repeatedly proved—that the spectators werea
brutalised, that many had subsequently bec°ll,o
criminals, and that a great majority of the number w
had been executed had, at some period of their lita
witnessed an execution.—(Hear, hear.) If it conferest
good upon the public —if it inculcated a grail
moral lesson its infliction ought to be mor
edignified, instead of hurrying it over as if they "bad
ashamed of what they were doing. Its effect Was
in the extreme, for after the criminal was rather c
sidered a hero than pitied. Attempts had been /on
es
to get the punishment inflicted in private, in °•rt• it
that the public mind might not be brutalised; imitetlhey
were made private what would become of the example
wished to inculcate?—there was an end of it at on
ere
But further, if they established private executions, cabers
then was their great moral example ? Such rtairr
ments could not be inflicted in a free country without 0
ceiving the full force and pressure of public opinion,; titbd
in a country like England, no punishment thniee,
not fully combine the feeling of public appoug"res•
could be long maintained it must have the full exP eat
sion of this opinion in its favour. It might be said tnti.
public opinion went in favour of the law, but the rew
tion3 which he had presented that night would but
that this was not so. And not only these petitions+, the
daily experience and the annually growing feeling °'.ol,‘
country was against the punishment of death. Butit 0115,
be asked, what would he substitute for it ? tindery*
refinement of the system of punishment which had ta for
place thep might fairly substitute imprisonment 0,
life. this had been trie:l in other countries, and he 5
no reason why it should not be tried in this. It "!his
this system of punishment was not severe enough; 1-1,,,a
opinion it was far more severe on the individual toPme '
the punishment of death, while it held out she
prospect of the reformation of the crani ht
In shorter periods of imprisonment the prisoner ra go,
come out, if not altogether improved, at. least comps 0d
Lively pule. This might be done by imprisonment,i,ht
if legislstion could not accomplish every thing. it in'n're•
do much towards alleviating the evils by which the ofl'," •
sent system was beset. But it was not for the object
4
punishment that the imprisonment should be imposed'"t
much as the reformation of' the prisoner, and theYrt,es.
strike deeper than that tor the extirpation 'fb:/0 to
They must educate the people, and not leave ; et re.
conceive that punishment was to become a s°l.- __one
verge. There were two sorts of education the
which was internal, and which arose fromwhich
operations of the mind itself ; and the otherxtertod
was external, derivable from the influence ote" hey
to Those were the means by which they'they
to effect the improvement of the culprit, for rt most
looked to the periods when the punishments were that
severe, they would find that crime was at time
time most frequent. They need not look to th,e, were
of Henry the Eighth, when 70,000 person -o,oold
executed, but to contemporaneous history they twit
find from the excellent book of the King of Sweden's one
in Spain, where crime was most frequent there wathere
execution to every 150,000 persons, but in SWedeltorl,
was one only to every 170,000 of the poPu
swot(
The Hon. Member then quoted certain statistics to, 0,0
that in those countries where the punishment of death ,
less frequent, the crime of murder was proportionsu`)reise
minished. He was aware this subject required the elereer
of great patience on the part of the House, as the at ,
merits were neither very new nor very interesting ; he
there was one point to which he must refertxien
meant the consideration of this questio in connff tee
with the doctrine of Christian repentance. Some 'death
opponents of the abolition of the punishment of 801
had conceded that two or three, four, five, or tell. 00;
should be granted for repentance, but they th,'l7,npitil
ceded the principle that the abolition of ab,-„erieu
punishment was necessary, as who could tell wha'ife big;
was required for repentance. In all periods of S,oocea
toffy of the world, when civilisation had au wish
to the highest point, and the greatest, hoot
was shown to avoid the infliction of the puntsat the,
of death, in the high and palmy days of Rome, „-erioa
close of her Republic, when she had attained the,.ratioat
of her highest grandeur, and her greatest eiviLteatly
they found in the fourth oration of Cicero against said
line, that there were many among them 19430
Morton a diis immortulibus non supplicii cania-.„
oefe
&darn ; itaque cum sapientis nunquarn inviti fortes .000
libenter oppetiverunt.' They found that this avers; .eted
inflict the punishment of death was admirably dePvlearg
in a speech of Mons. De Lamartine some pool'
ago in the Chamber of Deputies inn re'
H i
He called upon the
House to unite with him 1104
pealing the punishment of death, to achieve t nd to
a great social, moral, and religious victory, %or/
(Air up a last sacrifice, expiatory of the sangirtlisr
legislation of the past, upon the united altars of el
tion and Christianity. that
Dr. BOWRING, in seconding the motion, s-nd out
every discussion which took place in that House,
of doors brought the time nearer when the total hag
tion of capital punishment would take place. Sacco se not
hitherto attended every attempt to mitigate the
,_s.ed
of the criminal laws of the country, and he donn,i,iition
but that the same result would follow the total auva dis'
of the punishment of death. It would be found that ota
regard of human life was always associated with a
of barbarism, and that a disposition to 11.1400
the sacredness of life, and an unwitadistiir
to throw it away, was the great, the. ~toity,
guishing boast of civilisation and chris'S phis
and the furtherst advance of civilisation and or
losophy. It would be found also that in a there
society in which human life was waste. toe,
would also be found the greatest amount of...ivrae of
The legisture wanted to create a horror of the
tit'le'y be.
murder, and yet by means of their lessislatioe., rrotatd
came murderers themselves •, they wished to :it unislr
life by safeguards, and yet by their systems °f pit nag
ment they strove to overthrow and destroy it. 1- blifer
the intention of the legislature to c h gear./
they should not take it away themselvese"-kenj he
The murderer was a man of universal abhorrer
undoubtedly ought to be so ; but did they eFicettntehienift
object by this mode of punishment ?
_ad
al
_roc
impressed upon the public mind any additiort..7ooart
By no means. It appeared to him that of all. SaasteSS
beings who gather around the scaffold, the. prof the
number of them applaud the courage andhecothis; bee;
sufferer, instead of decrying his crime. Let
otloietmwsielliivnegs at the
dtheestrni,gyhthefne—d,lebty sthheomwinahgowtthosthtti_tter.fpitcoili
their estimate, was a thing too valuable to
o,ectitY
thrown away, and thus, by adding to the and lair
life, they would create a new stateoftlai
rbes_atienhile
prove the public mind, as even to effect
rm
the man who was disposed to throwlifeaway',.e
suffering t" :tier
sacrifices of life, and the amount of
_awe other
nishment led to, induced him to think that 5
prop rtelY
be
mode of punishment could with safety
tion of the past with
adopted. It was most
alr"
experiments they ueese
t
much as it proved that the expert
thegratifying legislation
ofe itialitnreaps hadth eit,gl s6aly:
ld 01)t
would, therefore, agree to the motion
be con ad
made had been successful, and
.ohneohf oheiseduethoefrieed.
Sir GEORGE GREY regretted that , h
ri•!
sought leave to introduce. On the
agree to the Biil which the Hon.
which was •
true lie had avoided the objection w „Otto
ii
was
a similar 10
merly entertained with respect to ago. a
which the Hon. Gentleman made som yearsobrought lorwar
1841, he believed the Hon. Gentleman present G n toi
ce
cies s
aaffirermsoeldutiothna,
tn,liiacht,hief iotphinaidonbeeonf atdhtaTtot.e.6o_ewl.e°,ulitinbephiAtvasel
punishment ought to be altogether ahltebjeettou
resolution as that was open to the greatestad
been adoßteelt
of
and would have had the effect, if it h
placing these intrusted with the ad.
rn tra
the law, in a very painful and duaicniaissptote
joutioluoL