The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1866-1891, 1869-02-04
THE JOURNAL.
Thursday, February 4, 1859.
THE ABOLITION OF CAPITAL
PUNISHMENT.


has passed statute abolishiug capital
punishment in South Carolina. What
are the provisions or exceptions of the
Bill we cannot say certainly, having
never seen it, but its name, at least i'm
ports great sweeping, radical change
in our criminal jurisprudence This is
another triumph of republican ideas
brought about by those who have but
lately been imported from the favourcd
worth. There is one circumstance we
were pleased to note in connection with
the history of this bill. That is, the
opposition it met with from native
Carolinians. Some of our colored le-
gislators dared to differ from their lead
er and Dictator Mr.. Corbin, aud exert
ed themselves to defeat the measure
regardless of the terror of party despo,
tism. Any one who has observed the
proceedings of our Legislature must
have been struck with the fact that the
colored men in that body, especially
those ITO the manor born," generally
exert themselves on the side of conscr
v'tism, and show themselves more ju-
dicious and liberal than their white
contreres-
Now, this question of capital punish
mcnt has engaged the earnest attention
of all enlightened jurists and political
philosophers, and many different opin-
ions have been advanced concerning it,
1t is necessary to the preservation of
society that crime should be punished
1t is very natural to suppose that when
the law threatens heavy penalty, the
vicious and evil disposed will be de-
tered from the commission of crime by
fear, Of the terrible Consequences
Therefore, some have argued that a
code written in characters Of blood and
enforced with a strong, unsparing hand
would prove panacca for all the di
seases of society. On the other hand,
it has been maintained that the certain.
ty, rather than the severity of punish
ment is to be aimed at; that the law
impairs or destroys its efficacy by being
too stern and vindictive. The expert
encc of rulers has proved that this last
position has good ground to rest upon.
When a prisoner is put upon lis trial
charged with crime to which is an
nexed the punishment of death, he has
many chances of being acquitted, even
though the sober sense of his judges
may be convinced of his guilt. When
the jury feel the solemn responsibility
of their position, any little doubt or
bubble, which could have no weight
in less important matter, will induce
them to acquit rather than condemn
Better that ten malefactors should 60
unwhipt ofjustice than that one innocent
man should suffer death. Again, al,
though he may be convicted and SEN
fenced, the intcrcession of friends and
the clemency ofsa merciful executive
may iuterpose to ward 1ff the extreme
penalty, and secure communication oi
punishment: But if the punishment
were lighter, and the consequences Of
executing the sentence not so irrepara,
ble, the chances of the guilty being
brought to justice and made to atone
for their offences would be much great.
er and therefore crime would be eradi:
Gated and the State benefited. That
there is truth in the above arguments,
we do not deny, but we are old fogies,
narrow minded and Ignorant enough to
believe in the efficacy of capital punish
ment. Take the case of a man who
feels prompted to commit the crime of
arson. This is a heinous offence, and
the law threatens the perpetrator with
death on the gallows. He knows that
men have been hung for the same Of
fences and must consider that such may
be his fate. His guilt may be so clearly
proved, and his conduct so aggravated
that no conscientious scruples or doubts
in the minds of the jury, no palliating
circumstance offered to the Executive
can save him. Reflection uron such
terrible probabilities is enough to deter
any one from deliberate crime. Pre-
vention is better than cure in all cases,
and especiall in the administration of
justice. Suppose we change the penalty