The Portland daily press., 1869-02-26
or ,be Death Peualsy-One Word More.

OF the Death Penalty-One Word More.
To the Editor of the Press:
Our friends at Augusta, Mr. Reed and Mr..
Norris have argued this awful question ably,
and with becoming seriousness. But we need
to have one consideration urgedlupon our law
givers with more emphasis.
For one say, unequivocally, that if hanging
is needed for the protection of society, and if 40
substitute can be found, where life has been
deliberately and wilfully taken, without prov
ocation, then let the criminal bs hanged.
And I say further, that although no man
may have right over his own life, notwith-
standing the usages of war and the risk
men voluntarily incur every day for good
purpose, the right of self-defence exists, and
may be delegated to the law giver.
But then, we urge that hanging is not need
ed, and that substitute may be found in inn
prisonment for life, provided such imprison-
ment be both certain and speedy, both of these
elements being indispensable for our security
against murderers, thieves and other offenders:
and that the natural and inalienable right of
self-defence does not undergo change by alien
alton, or transfer to the law giver SO as to be-
retaliation, where delegated, it continues with
out enlargement as the right of seL-defence,
and nothing more.
Bentham and Beccara were but the forerun-
ners or antceedents of complete and inevita-.
BILE change of public opinion.
And now, in a word, is the death penalty
protection, or is it not? safeguard or snare?
At time when there were no less than one
hundred apd sixty capital offences under Eng
lish law, Blackstone wrote as follows: "The
injured, through compassion, will often forbear
to prosecute: juries, through compassion, will
sometimes forget their oaths, and either acquit
the guilty, or mitigate the nature of the Of
fence: and judges through compassion, ooil
respite one-half Of the conuicts, and recommend
them to the royal mercy"
If this be true, what became of the security
contended for by the advocates of the death PEN
ally? And was it not, is it not true? myself
murders, proved guilty by the clearest evil
dence and acquitted nevertheless on both. And
| why?
| By Statute TX Hen. I, larceny to the value
| of taoelus pence was punishable with DEATH "It
is true," says Judge Blackstone, "that the mer-
cy of juries will often make them strain point
and bring in larceny to be under the value Of
twelve pence, when it is really of much great
er value; but this, though evidently jatstifable
and proper (perjuY justifable and propsr) is
otherwise kind of pious perjury"
We have case in point. A jury rendered a
verdict of guilty, and estimated a siver tank
ard at tenpence. "Tenpeneep exclaimed the
prosecutor, @why, the very fashion of it cost
me two guineas." "But we didn't hang people
for fashion sake," said the Judge; and the
criminal went free-free, at least from the
halter. Where then is our protection? Where
the safety we are promised, if the death penal
| ty be revived? j. N.
P.S. One point in our friend Morris able
argument had overlooked. In what does the
alleged covenant with Noah, where the Great
Lawgiver says, "Whoso sheddeth mans blood
by man shall his blood be shed" differ from
the declaration of Christ that "AU they thai
take the s,oord shall perish soith the sDord" Il
one must be taken literally why not the other