New-York daily tribune., 1856-04-25
vAGARIRs OP LAW,


OF any pamcs-say Kerrgsa aad Matthews-iu tie
course OF which the latter receives bullet in b,
thorax. from pistol fred BY The former. SAP.
posed TO be in diving conditien be- is borne Of %
hospital bis wound il there discov8ed 3 be not
sslily fatal; the ball has narrowAy missed
vital spot he me,ds rapidly; sni when cOnvL.
e,cence is sufficiently assured declares his disn.
clinatiou to prosecate the shooter. who is tahea
before magistrate aud discharged. OF course,
the intervention OF Justice is thus finally precudei
We bave reyelcd so little among what Mr..
Sampson Brass was won't 20 term the delightful
ictions OF the law. that il is with profound dh.
deuce We venture to call in question tho propriey
of this proceeding. II is certainly common
enough. Out of every three flonieS ore at least
fails to figure before Grand Jury, because some.
bcdy is indispOsed TO prosecute. Peace OFF.
Gers, having no eyes, are naturally exempted
from any such public duty. They are also en-
titled to select from among the bystanders at
scene OF crime or violence the individual 10 whose
clemency the fate of the offenders shall be sub
mitted. These appear to be well-established prin-
ciples Whether felon shall be punished d.
p, nd. in TIE fIst instance upon the discretion Of
some unknown party. r. the sentiment of that
unknown party be yindctive, then the vast ma
chiuery Of justice Indictment trial. sentence and
executive clemency-nlay be permitted 10 act
upon the case; the entire functions of Prosecuting
Attorneys, Jurie. Advocates, judges, and the
pardonrg power, are dependent upon this pre-.
liminary judgment Ii il be lenent. justice ia
superseded and notorious rufiian or thief, or
swindle-, ia turned out upon society. This must
be right; it is the daily practice of police mags
trates aud in referring to the fact at all, il is onlJ
20 confess our inability TO reconcile it with certain
OtIer principles AID facts equally authenticated By
legal precedent
Thus: punishments il is declared, ara inflicted
for the protection OF society-not for the grati6cs
ton ofprvate vengeance II Robert knocks John
down aud ill-trests him, Robert j. guilty Of
breach of the peace, Of an ofen.e against society
that be sud Others of similarly pugnaciOus tenden.
cies may become peaceful citizens. The penalty
ia not retributiye nor retrospective: il looks wholly
to the future good of the community So Il s
murder or burglary, or theft be committed, legal
authorities seree in assuring US that punishment is
indicted only as a warning sslutary TO society aud
not BY way e retaliation upon the individual of.
ender for the individual wrong.
With this doctrine how are We ~ square the ab.
solute authority assigned 70 the witness of a crime
TO decide as 70 the punishment or impunity of the
criminal What is the social claim to Justice
wor'h when 4 superior power is vested in any
persOo, however obscure-an accomplce, perhaps,
in the fact The real ofense of the hghwsyman
is agaiI ST ire community; the individual robbed is
ouly an incident Of the crime. With what reason
is he admitted to speak for society to grant an sb
solution which can only emsnate properly from
the body Legally injured AID place in the hands o;
the robber a rowing commission against tho public
at large
But II the Injured party refuse to complain
Here we have another problem. There is no &C
currerce more common than the arrest Of bystand
ers ard witnesses OF off nses and their imprison.
ment, or release upon security, TO make sure Of
their appearance upon trial An informer is but
witness be is on precisely the same footing a. srS
other. The compulsory processes applicable 20
others apply IS nicely to him. He has no moral or
legal righ. 20 refuse his testimony. The officers Of
law are bound by every obligation 10 enforce the
surrenje, ofthst evidence the repression OF which
defeats the ends OF ju,tice. Are witnesses before
Grad Jury or in open Court permitted, upon
vague plea Of dsiLcnston, 70 refuse to testify
WY then should that license be granted them in
advance. aud BY an inferior officer OF justcel
Let us assume that instead OF merely wounding
the man Matthews Kerrigan had shot him dead on
the spot. The Judgment of the victim could not,
Of course. be appealed to in that case, 20 deter
mike the application or Withholding Of justice from
the murderer Witnesses, we also dare 10 believe.
could have been found " establish the crime.
Would the Dretrnses haze been ventured then that
tie homicide must b. set at liberty, because the
victim colld 40, OF would not appear sgA'nst him.
s0d taat 40 other per-ons we're competent TO IN
t,rp or that 40 means existed 70 ex:0ft their eyi-
denct Z disposed 10 testify Tse qaestio1 -
Leed.css. a1d ". i shows with Rbar shadows VI
Justice we are dealing. L. was a mere issue OF
inches between the crime Kerrisan did commit
and tie one se might 3sve comrattted. Indeed Il
motive be the criterion hs actual and possible
guilt are precisely equal Whether bis bali
grsze1 TX pericsrdgm Of Matthews and lea
him 70 I've. or entered his heart 1a
consigoel hin % death could not AFFECT me
motive u the latter e7eLT, The cells OF Sing sag
would 10 tt. c-d.oary course Of justce have ifea
BIZ home FOR ten wears ARd lpon that sigEk ci-
fere1ee of admeayremeIt-the breadth oI4 ei
- -..rLs,..ba az Q, - innocence OF the party,