Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1845-1851, 1846-01-08

sion of the public will In South Carolina there was
still law making it the duty OF persons going to
church to carry arms, but 1t Is dead letter. The
occasion for that law has long since passed away.
The Blue Laws Of Connecticut were bit an express
of public opinion at the time they were enacted. A
few wears ago a man indicted Tor murder III
WAYNE county, and acquitted when every man on
the Jury would have sent HIN to the penltentlary,
such was their conviction Of his guilt but there was
bare possibility of his innocence and such was
their adherence If taking human life that he
acquitted 1t was the force of public opinion that
operated in degree upon their minds, and In many
instances, under influence, jurors would so stretch
their oahs as almost to commit perjury, rather than
give verdict that would take life. Change tie law
and these persons would be convicted. Viewing tie
question in this light the arguments OF the gentleman
from Monroe could not have much weight. 1t had
been contended that murderers would be more likely
to escape from our State prison than others Tins
was not the case. He had been Informed by one
versant with State prisons that individuals con-
fined for murder were more easily managed than
many others. 1t principle laid down by the
best writer's OH the subject that the certainty rather
than the severity of punishment the most effect
ual remedy against crime. lie answered the gentle
man from Monroe, i'll relation to treason III time OF
war. That gentleman was Constitutional lawyer
and should recollcct that regulates Its own laws.
SO the gencmans argument III tins particular, falls
to the ground.
Mr. Vandeveer said, there were others much better
quaife than himself TO discuss this question but
he had place here, and he would give few of the
rea sons for his the present occasion. 1t
principal of our nature, on the impulse OF the mo-
men TO desire to the guilty punished but on
sober reflection our better principles predomnatcd,
and our reycneeful and vndiciive feelings would be
gone. Our only desire for punishment then is TO
deter from crime. SO far is concerned he
agreed with the gentleman from Wayne that war had
lis own laws SO far treason is concerned he df
fcred with the gentleman from Monroe. He could
not agree that it should always be punished with
death. Because men might be mistaken IN what con-
stitutcd treason, and cited the of Dorr To show
that it would not always be right TO take the life of
those charged with this crime. He asked the gentle
man from Monroe that If the State prison be Il
palace, where there Is two dollars day and roast
beef shall commit crime to go there lie
thought if his friend from Monroe and himself were
be placed there, but for single day, they would come
ont pound lighter
Mr. Hcnton said that il was admitted by ALL that
the penal sanctions of laws grew of the necessity
Of human action. Seneca says they are not u benefit
the past actions of men, bat the future. lie went IN
for capital punishment. He thought II neither incon-
sistent with the Improvement Of the times nor of
Christianity. He conlendcd that punishment should
always be analogous To the crime for which punishment
was inflicted. Hence the divine prccept of blood for
blood. and that pollution from blood could not be
cleansed without the blood Of him who shed il. Ii
had been conended that these things lad been done
denied. The proper Interpretation was that We
should let the law have lis course. that should not
take vengeance INTO our own hands-that We should
not have mobs The law. Paul SAYS. is school
master to bring to Christ. 1t that we should not
realiate-not that we should suffer ourselves to be
murdered without resistance. If have done deeds
SAYS Paul worthy Of death, let me d.e-showing con-
clusivcy that his opinion hat law Of this kind
was not improper. Paul did not teach this new doc
rine. 1t Is cOnended that II X wrong To take away
life before the criminal has opportunity to repent
This life is but probationary state, and we might
well ask the Almighty suffer disease cease in order
TO afford individuals time for repentance 1t does not
take LONG 20 repent, may be eXemplIied in the
of the thief on the cross. With regard To public
opinion il is generally admitted, that the who
commits cold blooded murder deserves to die II being
a punishment more commensurate with the crime than
any other, and more exemplary in Its character. He
asked with much earncstneSs what is the public opin-
ion in regard that man who watches his victim
unpercciyed, and with his steel un>heathed, Ia es
human life-it is perhaps father, whose poor little
children left destitute In the world, and the very
bread taken from their mouths-the man murders for
money He believed that taking life in such case
was popular YOu send the wretch to his long home
He is removed from society beyond recall and cannot
again have opportunity to prey upon it. With
regard to solitary confinement 1t INJURIES the mind,
and in many instances insanity ensueS, when 1t would
be impossible for the individual To repent. If this is
not Immediately the case the victim of the law most
generally procrastnates till his mind and energies
are destroyed and all repentance is over He con-
tended that it would be wrong take from the labor
of the country to support murderers 80 far as hard
labor in the penitentiary is concerned 1t Is not anaa
rous 10 the crime, and Is exemplary in Its charac-
tcr-there can be nothing alarming to the mind of
the murderer as the idea Of ceasing to be-and men
have been known TO remark. that they would rather
have fifty lashes every day than be put to death.
Mr. Mcdonald was in favor of the adoption of the
amendment
Mr. Julian wished gentlemen to give expression
as to how far they would be willing to 60 In abolish
ing capital punishment.
Mr. Hall of Gibson said that he was not willing,
at this time to abolish capital punishment altogether.
There cold booded murders and ons that
oupht to be punished with death. He did not rise to
make speech. but merely to give expression of
his opinion as had been requested by the gentleman
from WAYNE.
Mr. Osborn of Laporte said. that under the present
law, Jury must either punish with death acquit
they must either violate their oath, by convictng of
less offence, or let the criminal 90 free.
Mr. Porter was like the gentleman from Gibson
opposed abolishng capital punishment in all cases,
but would support the proposition now under conslde
ration for should criminal be sentenced TO DEATH the
Governor would still have the power under the Revised
Statutes to commute the punishment.
Mr. Cruikshank said, he had concluded not to vote
for the amendment, but half loaf better than
no bread He had hoped that this foul blot would
have been wiped from statute book. He could
not see how the BILL if passed, with the amendment,
would be mucn more humane than the present law.
Mr. Lowe had not disclosed the whole ground of
his opposition He would now do He believed
there were a few where punishment should not
be inflicted capitay. With regard to treason and
duelling, he would make exceptions These crimes
should always be punished with DEATH In otter cases
he would be willing leave discretionary power In
fbp urv 9th tn Will Or