Tribune and telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1855-1856, 1856-04-03
BAILEY

MR.. RUrTs
Your Madison Correspondent, who
suppose is the senior editor of the Tribune e. Tel
egraph, in speaking of the bill to restore Capital
Punishment says, Il shall do no more than an act
OF common justice TO the Rev. Mr.. Gridley OF our
city, when state, that to him more than to any one
individual belongs Tie credit of preventing return
to the old system
This is somewhat remarkable allegation Of Mr..
Shoes and il is supposed that gentleman Of his pro-
iessedly nice regard for consistency would have ex,
amned the nature his statement carefully, before he
made it.
Let us examine it. = Mr. c. delivered an argument
in the Assembly Chamber, the evening of the 29th
January, maintaining that all crime has desert;
that in regard TO the crime of murder, God has in
his word declared the desert, and imperativey afix
ed the penalty of death. He also maintained that a
proper erpedicacy comedies with this view; which
taken together verify, constitutes an unanswer-
able reason why the death penalty should bcrestored.
This argument, Mr.. S. AYERS. contributed more than
any one thing besides TO induce Assembly to refuse
to restore the Death Penalty!
How is that! we wuold inquire. The argument
must have been q very influential one, to produce
the result ascribe to it, The members who were in
fluenccd by it to vote against the restoration must
have esteemed il a truthful arguments for certainly,
men of their unders landing, could not he suspected
of being swayed by that which they esteemed to be
false. A false argument would have passed by them
without making any abiding impression. 1t certain
", as we suppose, could not have influenced them,
to vote as they did The hearing of testimony which
jury believes to be false cannot induce that jury
to give an adverse verdict, merely because of that
f,1e ali boo -aS
tmony, there no proof before them, either for or
against If there be counte-vailing testimony, ;hen
the latter induces the verdict, not the former
Now then, if it be true, that Mr.. Griiley by that
argument ''did more than any individual to pre-
vent return to the old system, follows that one
or two other things also be true viz: A major
y of the House voted against that view OF the sub
ieet which they believed to be true; and also opposed
by their vote boldly and impiously the legislation
of jehovah, and proper expedieney founded there
on. They cast their vote against demand of the B
BILE argument, which have said, if it influenced
them at all they must have believed to be true; or
taking the other horn of the dilemma acknowledge
ii themselves to be persuaded by that which they be
lieve to be false. What will Mr.. s, say to that p
What will the members thus by him stultified, say
10 i'll
The truth is, Mr. Editor; all this ;wnddle, by the
enemies of the death penalty, or, of its false friends
amounts to no argument, disproving the claims OF
the Bible for the infection of death for murder NJ
one has yetdsproved those claims, that have seen
In both the majority and minority reports Of the
Committee, these claims are seemingly ignored
And what does that fact declare TO the world, bat
that such legislation is regardless of the Divine
thority; or gnorantly ects il as without foundation
That human legislation which opposes the princi
pies of the Divine, is a miserable impiety ana can
not fail to be damage, and disgrace, both TO the
actors in it, and those whom they represent!
The House of Assembly did, by a much smaller
majority than feared, indefinitely postpone that bill
But if the members from Kcnosha County had not
disappointed the reasonable expectations of their
constituency, i, would have been otherwise. On
them, therefore, rests a fearful responsibility