Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1861-04-04
Criminal NATURALIZATION,

About TWO weeks ago a woman was taken
to the Ohio Penitentiary, sentenced for big
amy. She said her husband deserted her in
poverty with her children. He was gone
for years, and she suppoSes forever; she
knew not whether dead or alive. A man
offered her home and she accepted, and
they were married. Both were sent to the
Penitentiary.
Will any one inform us what good is done
by making convicts of these two persons
driving them from the sympathy of society
for the rest of their lives; making outcasts of
them and degrading their children?
There is nothing so cruel as the law; /;
nothing that creates so much crime, degrad-
alton and misery. Here is a whole family
made outcasts for no crime. Ostensibly it
is to preserve the sanctity of marriage
bond, which one party had broken, both
morally and legally. They might have en-
tertained the same relation, without the
form, without becoming liable to any pen
atty. Bot it seems they were too unsophisti-
Gated for this; so their regard for the moral
codeof society brought them into the clutches
of the law.
People will say, of course, that she might
have procured a divorce. Probably this is
TIE first idea that will occur to our comfort
ably married friends, who insist that there
should be no divorce. Why she did not, we
know not But we can imagine that poor
woman in the country, struggling 10 the
most unIemunerative employments to sup
port her children, may not have regarded
divorce ss within the reach of her means.
Very likely, also, she thought marriage
which vas nothing but betrayal and de
sertion on one side, could not be very sacred,
especially after the lapse of time.
Our readers will take notice that this
couple conformed to the customs of society
by that alone subjecting themselves to this
penalty and that all the reason on which
this sentence can be founded is the sacred
nature Of her former marriage to a man who
had deserted her in poverty, and burdened
with the support of his children.
Is that holy bond that should require the
sacrifice Of whole family TO infamy, to be
visited Cd children and several generations
1t is our impression that the Judge and
Jury that condemned these persons to the
Penitentiary ought to take their places. We
are not given to strong language, and are
weighing our words now.
Ifany one is disposed 10 martyrdom in the
cause Of philanthropy, lethim devote himself
to the investigation of the administration Of
justice. Our orthodox friends, like the
writer in the Free Nation, whom we COM
mented on, naturally think that what is
needed is a more summary and rigid judg.
meDt, and less regard forniceties of law or
evidence, and less facilities for new trials.
But had they zeal to undertake line Of
philanthropy which is not popular, and
which, perhaps, will bring on them the CEN
sure of the very gOdly, they may find that
the chief moral distinction between the peo-
pie in our State and other prisons, and those
out of them, is in the stone walls and bar,
and bolts which separate them.
Almost every crime punished by ou
statutes, can be and is, constantly eommitte,
in some way which includes ell the mora
guilt, and all the injury TO others, withou
liability 10 the law. For instance Wha
constituted the moral offense in the bigam
case above noticed. Tie violation Of th
former marriage by oohabiting with al
other. This was the immoral act. The foI
NAL marriage was only the proof of the &C
Suppose all known violasors of their mar
riage bonds even while ostensibly regard
So, fhann vyera nnptobad Ia tha Dan;ton
aiary2
The State is incompetent 70 do il. Sc
riety would cry out against the burden (
such provision Of Penitentiaries. So, &C
ual sins are winked at but now and the
an ostensible violation like the one referre
TO, which can net be said 10 have been 3
actual crime, is atrociously punished for u
edi6eation of society. .,,a :.
In the case OF this species Of immorali
10 To- coo