New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1845-03-06
The Meeting to discuss the Abolition of ca
pItsI Punishment last Evening.
D.. HAzLirI n The Char.

4 gentleman. (Mr Dickerson,) desired 10 know
bow RI. question stood The reply OF the Rev. Mr..
RaIjou was thai those who are IN favor OF the gal
Iovrs should take the affirmative. This was cues
,ioned-,ne law having established the system, the
friends of abolition should take the affirmative
Rev. Mr.. BaIlou thought these meetings were SIM
DIV for the purpose OF obtaining information on this
subject, without rigid adherence 10 arsuraeniaiive
rules. Mr. Dickerson cid not obiect-he would
take the affirmative
There IL disadvantage in discussing the subject,
because most of the audience in favor OF aboll-
ton. The principle contended for is this: That
society has right 10 demand ihe highest security
for their persons and property so long no mus
lice is done to individuals 1t was attempted 10
show by divine law, that he who had taken the
hi, of another, should forfeit his own lie under
sIch circumstances. Does the safety or society
demand capital punishment On the other hand II
has been BEEN contended that the welfare OF socIe-
~ is no; the first Thing to De considered but the re-
formation Of the offender. II this car De established
our side OF the question fails. il Is the welfare OF
society that We believe OF primary Importance, and
no, that of the individual. Therefore, The, best
punishment, is that which can most completely re-
form the offender The second ground was, tquot-
ing Pslev) the prevention OF crimes THIS IL the true
reason for punishment, II we take the We" tti4t
The reformation Of the individual Is tne main tnns,
thrn we assert that the individual Is mere worth
than society The truth is, that the interests OF So
ciety arc primary, and the prevention OF CRIME Is
the sole object OF punishment Inc Stale Pfison
would be useless if the reformation OF the criminal
was the main point. So long as Death Is the hins
of Teuors, so long Will capital punishment be Inc
best preventive of crime. The Scripture arsu-
mens were next adduced; II these do not hold good,
,h- ground viii be yielded The gentleman entered
al length into this view OF the subject.
The Rev Mr. Balou said, IN support OF The doc-
irine OF the Abolition Of Capital Punishment, that
he should prefer TO speak 10 an audience VINO dld
NOT 5cree with him he desired 10 convince those
who heard him of the truth Of his view Of the CUES
non. The gentleman on the other SIDE oil the
question had said that the Divine Being had man.
tanned the doctrine OF Eternal Punishment. he
could meet him upon that. He DID not wisn 10
BRING this into the discussion. lie regretted tnal
onv thiEg sectaran had been brought INTO this
question. Divine and human penalties may be
disconnected The Clergy are often INTRODUCED IN
this matter as being III favor OF the GallowS ne
Clergy OF the Sect 10 which he belonged dld not
20 for it; nor the Untarlans nor the elndkeTs-
What is the object OF Punishment! de had not
laid down The position that the welfare OF the IN
diyidual was supreme. The ground he took was,
that where the good Of Society was not Inconslst,
emf with the good OF the Punished, then we should
look at the latter. The Dce,h-Penalty viii not best
answer the prevention OF crime. sUpposlns that 10 De
end OF Dunl- eminent. tt 'IdSIStIdte
Tie to do with the good Of the Punished, but the
Legislator. has much TO do has 10 redeem the
criminal If possiple He thought this could be
done. We can preserve the safety OF Society, and
also benefit the criminal. he thought men were
often driven 10 the COMMISSION OF crime oy CO.
cety. To show that the Gallows did not prevent
murder, he brought up the two cases-one IN Wor-
cester, the other in Troy-where murders were
again committed almost at the foot OF the gallows.
Men DEFY the Death-Penalty, but that does moi
show that they would break over the highest
penalty The Reverend Gentleman then took up
the scripture argument. Poetry had dubbed Death
the King of Terrors.' Bat there are things worse
than death, the violation Of truth the loss OF char
acier the failure in duiy, are all worse than death
How is ii with the bad man? Does he never
commit suicde--lte is worse 20 hun than death
Then comes the Nodchic dlspensa,lOn-" Whose
slaedde,h mans blood, by man shall his blood be
she'd !" What the divine Being enjolned upon Noah
and his seed, is not, therefore, authority The last
dispensation is what he considered blndlng-the du
ties laid down BY Christ If the law of love
sustains the srrneing up of men, till they are dead,
dead dead, then he would give up the question:
Chrsi's message was one OF salvation, not OF &C.
strnction. Hanging man Is the worst use he can
be put to- The murderer is guilty, but there can Qe
a worse evil inflicted upon society than murder lie
referred to the Philadelphia case, as a murder
where society did not consider II so great crime
as IN the casetof Crownnshied vet the death PEN
atty would cut them both of alike The murderers
are of different degrees in crime, bntt you have but
one Observation-Disclosures can be no dslinc-
ton between them.
Rev. Mr. Turbell continued the discussion. He
went for the law and the testimony. II abo!lshing
the galows will abolish murder, down with II. To
Try il as an expedency is very different matter;
hundreds might be sacrificed. Let us be careful!
how we contend against law and the Divine au,ho-
rity The gentleman had leaped from the Mosaic TO
the Christian dispensation, 10 the law of love; but
Christ came 10 fulfil the law, not TO destroy IL. Is
expedient is it for the good OF society TO do away
with the galIows If we do away with one part
of the Decalosue, 50 we may with all. lie then
examined the Scripture argument.
The audience was large, and apparently much IN
terested in the discussion.