Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1852-06-09

>
| Infctng clastisement to which it was the du-
ty OF the slave to submit the Governor thinks the
provocaton arising from it proper to be consider
ed Tor the purpose OF eXtenuatng the killing to
the minor offence of mansaughter; an offence
punishable, i'll the case of slave, with stripes
| merely. This is the clear result of both MESA
ges taken together.
The pardon or communication was put express
ly on the ground that the facts, at the utmost,
made case OF manslaughter. That is not re-
| tracted. 10 execute the sentence of the court
was declared to be against the spirit of our laws,
and of the age in which we live That was not
retracted. The passion excited by the collision.
and the suffering from the lash, were treated as
circumstances to extenuate the offence That
was not atoned for. In fact nothing is retracted;
all that is offensive of the first message remains
not only unretracted. but by the strongest and
most necessary implication, re-aifirmed and inss-
| ted upon The second message simply dsavows
an influence and comedies merely that neitherthe
passion OF the moment nor the smart of the lash
| furnishes excuse Or justification for the resist
ance OF the slave. 1t does not say consistently
with the first message it could not say that taken
together, they are not to be regarded as circunl-
| stances OF ertenuati0n. Before this could be said
the first message must be retracted, and the par
don deprived OF reason to rest upon. But 10
this condition his Excellency will by no means
consent.
Mr.. Scott said: To make the matter more clear-
~ understood he begged leave to explain, that in
the definition OF Offences homicide was valiously
divided according to the degree of delinquency
attending the act At common law, the killing of
any human creature is Of three kinds; unsuitable,
eGcusable and fclonious.
| Unsuitable homicide results from some unavoid
able necessity, created by the law or by the act
OF the party killed. without any manner of fault
| in the party killing. 1t is of several kinds:
| do oF !. Il
cution of war. g. Homicide in the execution
ofjustice. 3. Homicide in the advancement Of
justice 4. Homicide in defence of person or
property under circumstances of necessity. In
these cases the slayer is in no kind of fault what
soeyer, and is therefore acquitted and discharged
with commentator rather that blame.
Excusable homicide is of two kinds; either of
| misfortune or msadventure; or in self defence
In these cases some fault is imputed but so slight
that the common law excuses it from the guilt of
felony, and our law from all punishment.
Felonlous homicide is an act of a very diffe-
rent nature from either of the former, being tbs,
killing OF human creature without justification
| or excuse. But in this there are degrees Of
guilt, which divide the offence into maaslaughter
and muader.
Neither justifable nor excusable homicide, con-
stitute an offence, to the commission of either
| lsany penalty attached 1t was obscure, there
fore, to talk OF a person being charged with JUS
Unable or excusable homicide But manslaupht-
er is an offence to whcha punishment is affixed
1t Is below the grade of murder, being wanting in
those ingredients OF deliberation and malice re-
quislteto constitute that high crime, and attended
by circumstances OF extenuation proper to relieve
the perpetrator from the penalty denounced
aeaist the murderer
Manslaughrer ttself divided into gol,,,,to,7,
and Involuntary; the former being punishable, by
our laws IN the case OF a free person, by confne-
ment i'll the penitentiary but both being punish
able, in the case of a slave, as a misdemeapor
merely
Now in the second message the Governor SAYS
that the chastsement by the master neither JUS
hted, nor excused the resistance of the slave
That is to say, the killing, consequent upon it,
could not be regarded as either ercusable or Jus
tfabLe homicide. And this is all that he does
say.
He still holds to the opinion of the extenuating
influence OF the passion and suffering and thus
leaves the great vice Of the first message in full
force and vigor; nowise retracted mtigated or
explained
He objected, therefore, to the resolutions with
which the substitute concluded, as insufficient to
express the just condemnation of the mischievous
doctrine, and he objected more to that part of the
preamble which expressed an implied acauiesence
In the condition in which the case was left by the
second message.
AS tar as this message went he concurred in its
legal views, but it stopt very far short of the pre-
per point, and for that reason excited his opposi-
| ton.
Entertaining these opinions of the substitute it
followed that he was more strongly opposed to the
| resolution of the committee. That contained an
undisguised approval of the doctrine of the first
message, for it was only against the inference sup
posed enormously to be deducible from it, that the
resolution expressed objection. With the expla-
nation OF the second message, the committee YVES
| satisfied, and this House was asked to concur in
the report and DECLARE also, its satisfaction to the
public.
That no injustice may be done to the members
OF the committee, by whom the report was sub
| mitted, he would quote their resolution verba-
| tim
''Resoved That while this House respectful
ly, but distinctly dissents from the doctrines ex-
| pressed by the executive in the message Of the
1lth'of May, as generally understood and inter-
preted previous to the message of the 9th MAY,
it expresses its satisfaction at the sentiments pro-
claimed IN the latter message, and its concurrence
III the egavews OF the executive contained there.
in; except so far as not TO express an opinion of
the correctness C the conclusion of the executive
as to the propriety of the Communication of the
punishment of the slave.'
1t was with the first message, as generally I'M
derstood and Interpreted previous to the explana-
tory message, that these gentlemen were dssatis-
neu; III the legal views or the latter they entire
ly concur, nd not content with declaring this
concurrence, they go the whole length and ex-
press satisfaction" at the sentiments proclaimed
in it, and then they studously avoid the express
sion OF any opinion touching the propriety of the
communication granted by the executive.
As between the report of the committee and
the substitute, therefore, Mr.. Scott said he should
vote Tor the latter, as more proper to be adopted
by the House, and as approaching more nearly to
what in his judgment, the occasion demanded
Under no circumstances would he vote for or sane
ton the resolution of the committee.