Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1843-03-03


brave mon OF the guilty; for what man, for example,
will dare defend his property, if villain sets upon
y, when the very defence may make the villain muir
der him, you having taken away from the villain
himself all fear of DEATH matter what crime he
commits. II man breaks into your house at mid
night with the knowledge that the punishment for
murder is death, though thnt for house-breaking is
not you might be ready TO confront him, and defend
your property but if you take away This pcnalty,you
paralyse your own arm, and you nerve the house,
breaker with tenfod desperation, since he may finish
his vllany with success If he murders you, and If he
be caught the punishment for murder at all events is
no greater than that for housc' rcakng and if he does
not murder you when you have confronted him he is
IN danger OF discovery at my rntc. You are there
fore rendered defcnceless in an attack upon your
property by the security of your adversarys lc or
If at all events you do attempt to defend your prop
erty and discover drive away the villain, you are
almost sure to- be murdered, if he can murder you
for his life is safe, while the taking of yours is per-
haps neces' airy to his success. He bears charmed
life, the consciousness Of which unnerves you, but
nerves him. Just so If your person be assaulted and
you resist yonr very defence is likely 10 procure
your murder for you are the helpless one, your as
sailnnt has ali the advantages the nssassln cannot be
killed, he is secure by law; but if he kills you. he
may escape completely. To abolish this penalty
would therefore be gross inusti cc and inhumanity
both to The innocent who are murdered, and TO the in
nocent who nre living. 1t is securing the murderer
against death. but exposing the community 10 death
by the hand Of any william, who knowing that his
own life is protected by statute chooses 10 kill 1t is
III lHCt premium on WuIucT, us Wc SUcSt ~ cTtWCs.
II you commit any lower crime, you may be punish
ed for it too much. II you commit this crime you
are sure of punishment less than the evil you
infict upon others The glaring injustice and inhu
mainly of such an arrangement is perfectly obvl-
Gus.
Now TO fasen this argument with ncontrovertibe
power, l shall refer you TO case, which, though it
is on record, have received from relative Of
the monster concerned. The creature in his passion
held an axe over his wifes head. and told her that
nothing but the law saved her life. 81 would kill
you in a moment" said he, if did not know that
would have to swing for it," 1appeal to the good
cnse and humanity of our audience, that be-
,evolent STATUTE which extends that lonely and
wre,ched mother the only protection for herself and
children? And is not that a most nhumnn effort.
which seeks to take away from before that brutal
husband the fear of DEATH which, ns he himself says,
is all that restrain him 7 Which s the spirit Of
Christ the spirit that vndicaes the Inv, and pro-
tecs the community or the spirit that takes away at
once the dreaded penalty of the law and the protec-
ton of the innocent? Which is the benevolent ef.
fort that which throws its shield over the murderer's
life but gives up the unprotected victim to his malice
or that which binds and holds back the arm of the
murderer by making his own death the certain conse.
quence OF his intended crime ?
We come next to the statistical argument of my
opponent. And have to say at the outset that it is
OF such nature that you cannot trust it. The ar
gument from statistics SO far as it is gathered from
all offences below the crime of murder does not bear
upon the question Of capital punishment for murder at
all but If 1t did, your induction so narrow, many
cau,es unnoriced and the phases and influences
Of society changenble, that the results of your
figures in question of morals are like to be utterly
fallacous. 1t is often said that figures cannot lie,
but you may marshal them in such way to make
them tell a falsehood in ono direction, while they
speak the truth IN another
Nor can there be anything more palpably false.
and yet very p,ausi lie, than .hc mode sometimes
adopted in arraying these statistics. Here is a coun-
try, for example, in which the penal code annexes
death several crimes, but in which, for number of
years. from various causes, crime has diminished of
course capital punishments have diminished also
The murdershave not diminished because capital pun
shmens have diminished but the capital punlshmens
have diminished, bccau the murders have diminish
cd. Now your industrious ,stasticgatherers take
these facts They put the diminuon of the capital
punshmen,s first, and the diminution Of the murders
| rs the consequence In one column you see de-
crensng ratio of capital purishmens, in the opposite
n decreasing ratio of murders Ergo, the dlminution
of capital punlshments has diminished the murders!
This not eynctly, according to the VULGAR but phy
saying, the car; before the horse, but is rather the
horse behind the cart. And think need not labor
to expose either the a surdlty Of such statistics, or oil
| the conclusions draw from them.
When hear men reason on the nmcliora,ion of a
penal code and then ascrlbe to this me cause the
whole dlminuon of crime in society, i, seems TO me
much if DR.. Brandrelh should state how many
million boxes Of his pills society have taken in the
last half dozen years, and then having shown d.
minuiion of diseases in that PERIOD attribute the
whole Of improvement in the health of mankind to
his pills. The truth is, that this same dmnution Of
crimes would have been produced by other existing
| causes which undoubtedly are ut the foun ation oil
it, The decrease of intenperance, the influence o
Sabbath schools the prevalence of better education
an increased attendance the preaching Of the Cos
pei sufficient to account for improvements in so
cetv, which you trace directly 10 n change in the pc
nal code but if not, what manifest absurdity il i:
to set up the experience Of half dozen years, in
State, which on the map Of Europe you may cove
with sxpence, the experience for example Of Bel
GUM, only since 1880, and even that exper fence mos
doubtful in ITSELF and mos, mperlectly known, agans
the practice, reason, belief and experience Of al
mankind, in all states of society, in all ages OF thu
world. If l choose to reaso: in this way coul'
show you statistics in the recent experience of Eng
land to offset the experience of Belgium For exam
Pile it is well known from valuable tables constructed
by Rev Mr.. Redgrave, of the Home Olice, and an
nuay presented 10 Parliament thai since the rcmov
al of the penalty of death from Two hundred oense
in 1887, there has heen very considerable ncreas
of no less than thiry-eight per cent. What sha
we make Of this Shall we say that It proves tina
the penal code of England ought not 10 have bee
ameiorated? This would be the logic Of my oppo
nent, but say no. The facts are not broad enoug
10 justify the conclusion. There must be muc
longer experiment, a much wider and more caref,
induction, and after all, even if those oienses shovl
be found still TO increase that would not Justify III
applying to them again the penalty of death.
/, Now with regard to the crime Of murder, the cas-
is wholly different II ought stand apart in its per
atty from all other crimes And it is the anncxin
of the penalty Of death TO MANY other crimes tina
' has made the whole difficulty. Death has been ia
5 ken from the hand of the Divine Legislator, from til
i place he assigned 10 it a penalty, and most war
tonly most barbarously, mos, lndiscrlminaely appl
: ed to minor offences, in such wise, that the mind
filled with horror at the sangulnary and oppressl,
nature of such codes. Hence prejudice against I'll
infection of this penalty in any case. Hence has
proceeded that j. has become mere threat, in man
cases not executed. Hence the unwillingness Of j
s res to convict. Hence too the penalty Of death hf
lost its preventive power against crime, even the Grin
of murder; nay being applied to minor offences,
u follows naturally that murder itself would be COMM
ted TO conceal them. Now here is the secret of Il
n apparent weight of the statistical argument, which
reality hears not in The least degree against the punis
ment of death for MURDER but only in favor oresrc
II ing that penalty to the crime of murder NothiT
re can he more idle than array before us statistics
IN regard 10 minor crimes taken from countries whe
N in the penal code there has been great abuse Of tn
! penalty ofdeath. II has nothing to do with a
h pGment. TIE penalty of death, you say, being abe
p ished crime has decreased What does this NEAR
ID Isit a new principle in human nature develope
If whereby men will sin the more the more they have
" suffer for il? Not at ALL The solution of the ridd
5, is insi this When the penalty of death was CONNIE
G. for minor offences, committed murder IN the no
at to conceal their common crimes. Now The penal
as of death being taken away from such minor offence
r such murders for the conccalment of those ofenc
y cease, unless you take away the penalty of dea