The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-10-20
INFANTICIDE.

lnfantlcide. So far as we can Judge from the
very abridged report which appears in the
newspapers, the extreme absurdities which so
often attach to the treatment of this subject
byprofessed philanthropists we're avoided by
all bat two speakers. DR.. Elizabeth Black
well is represented as urging 'the great ad-
vantage of private charities for cases Of
women guilty of infanticide. We are in
clined to believe that what this lady really
urged must have been the advantages of
founding hospitals in preventing women
from committing infanticide. Even with
this correction Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell
would be open to the charge of forgetting
that, if founding hospitals diminish
infanticide, they greatly multiply illegtimate
births. As the report stands, however, her
suggestion is far more extraordinary There
are few things in morals more curious than
the leniency with which virtuous women re-
gard the crime of child murder in unmarried
girls. They seem to admit that the fear of
the shame and inconvenience following upon
discovery does in some sort excuse the act.
We believe we are right in attributing this
sentiment to the majority of good women,
and, if so, we commend the fact to Mr.. Mill
as a difficulty to be explained by those who
believe in the moral and intellectual identity
of the sexes. If women who have murdered
their children are objects of private charity
rather than Of public justice, the theories of
right and wrong which underlie our criminal
legislation must be altered and altered,
as we think, materially for the worse.
The other instance Of the pity which
is akin to lunacy was paper by
Dr. Green, who is represented as maintaining
that mo woman of sound mind wilfully de-
stroyed her offspring. It was done in the
desperation of the moment DR.. Green will
hardly maintain that n mother who throws a
child of five years old into the water is there
c1l, I II o,,I he.
stinct is not unerring when there has been
time for its development, why is to be infalli
bly, relied on at the moment of childbirth
We should like to know the data on which the
next speaker rests her Instances where Young
girls Systematically murdered their children
and learnt from their companions the art of
committing this crime, because, if this state
ment can be substantiated, it would supply
some useful suggestions for legislation.
Comparing the two statements with one an
other, we fear that Mrs. Meredith is a good
deal nearer the truth than DR.. Green.
The real difficulty of the case lies with
juries rather than with mothers The effect
of the present law in deterring the latter
from committing the crime has never been
fairly tried 1t is impossible to say what the
effect of capital punishment is in this direc-
ton, when capital punishment is never in
tiicted. English iuries have come in the case
of infanticide to the sane point as French
juries have come toin murder generally-they
allow for extenuating circumstances; and as
in France the fact that q murder has been
committed seems enough to constitute an
eXtenuating circumstance, SO with MS the fact
that the victim is the newborn child Of the
murderess is all that a jury demands to
describe the crime by a charitable figure
of speech as cOncealment of birth. The
necessary immortality of this state of
things hardly needs to be pointed
out. 1t involves on the part of juries o
systematic disregard of their oaths and COM
plete misconception of the part they have to
play in the administration of justice. If a
juryman's belief that the law assigning a
particular penalty to particular offense is q
harsh law is to excuse him from holding that
the commission of the offense has been salts
factorily proved, this mode of trial must ulti-
mately degenerate into a capricious applica-
ton Of private fances to legal issues. Upon
most other questions an honest iuryman
would see this without difficulty but when
infanticide is concerned it seems to be wholly
beyond his power of taking in. ''Ihe pre-
sent humane administration of the law"
which was praised at Bristol by DIR. Green, is
not an administration of the law" at ALL
it is a perversion of the law by juries
who are encouraged to think them
selves wiser than the Legislature, and
entitled for that reason to set aside its com
| MINUS NueheNeI Iuey CHOSE. Ii any cnauBe
| in the prescribed treatment of infanticide is
required, this is not the way in which it
should be introduced. Whether it is possible
to do anything towards bringing juries to
keener sense Of the duties which the State
requires of them it is difficult to say. They
| are the chartered libertines of our criminal
| jurisprudence, and there is hardly any means
| of reaching them, except the slow process of
changing the sentiment of the class from
which they are mostly taken. As it is, no
| one seems to care much about doing this.
! The frequent miscaniages of justice in the
| case of child murder are often enough alleged
az q reason for altering the law to please jury
men; but it is very rare to hear them alleged
| as a reason why jurymen should be taught to
| conform to the law
We do not deny that there are plausible
| arguments in favor of making distinction
| between infanticide at the moment Of child
| birth. when it is hard, if not impossible, to
pronounce whether the woman is really con-
scious of what she is doing, and infanticide
! it may be urged, in which the guilt of killing
a child a few minutes old and the guilt of
killing a child few weeks old ought to be
measured by different standard. But this
distinction is one which it is extremely dan
| gerous to reduce to rule. In themselves the
two acts are absolutely identical The only
| justification for treating the one more lenl-
| emily than the other is that it may be
| presumed to be more frequently attended
| by loss of that soundness OF mind which
is required for the commission Of crime.
But no one who reads the trials for in
! fanticide at the moment of childbirth, or
! the coroners inquests ON newborn infants,
which have been so increasingly frequent OF