Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1873-02-12


Bill an act to amend chapter lls, section 6,
Of the revised statutes, relative to the penalty |
for placing distractions on railroads, being |
On ito passage to be enacted, Mr.. NASH moved
TO suspend the rules in order that he might
move reconsideration Of the vote passing |
the bill to be engrossed. He wished to offer
an amendment by striking out that part which
related to sixty days solitary confinement.
He said he was in favor of the bill with the
exception of this provision, and thought If it
was not stricken out, it would tend to defeat
in a measure the object Of the bill. He was
opposed to solitary confinement. -
Mr.. MoRTLAND concurred in the remarks
of the gentleman from Gardiner Mr.. Nash).
penalty for the crime of placing distractions
on a railroad, but severe penalty deters ju-
ries in many instances from conviction for
the crime charged, for the very reason that
the penalty is SO severe. He thought the
penalty attached in the bill enough for the
crime, without the clause which provides for
solitary confinement, and that in this the 10Th
century, we should enact human laws. There
was not, he said, a medical man on the floor
Of the House, who had made insanity study,
but that would say no man can be subjected
to solitary confinement for sixty days, and
come out of that confinement a sane man.
Mr.. MATTHEWS was astonished at this new
found sympathy for persons guilty Of the
henious crime of maliciously and wilfully
placing distractions on a railroad. The bill
| is intended to deter men from the commission
| of the crime of obstructing railroads, and
prevent the destruction Of property and HUI
man life, and can any penalty be TOO severe -?
| 1t was new discovery. The idea of a man
becoming insane by sixty days solitary con-
fnement! Solitary confinement is no new
| thing in the history of our own penitentiary,
and he submitted that sixty days would not
be too severe punishment for the crime
sought to be prevented by the act.
Mr.. MoRTLANp replied. He recognized
the propriety of having a severe penalty for
the crime, and was DESTROYS of having men
guilty of it, severely punished, but he was OPP
posed to solitary confinement, and stigmatized
it as relic of barbarisu,.
Mr.. MATTHEWS again spoke in reply to the
gentlemen from Rockland. He had no sym
pathy for the rascals who obstruct railroads
wilfully and maliciously. We are now a rail-
road people. We are called upon daily to
travel over railroad lines. The cars are
crowded with human freight. We are con.
| stantly upon these railroads, and any moment
| we may be injured from the Vaccinations and
schemes of some villain as much worse than
Evans, as he is worse than an angel.
|
the rules, for he was in favor of the amend
meat. Solitary confinement has always been
repugnant to a free people, and never has
been allowed in this State, by any statute,
for only very short period. Last year it was
abolished entirely, except for prison disci-
pine. He did not desire to 60 back to a state
Of barbarism, and thought the other penalties
in the bill entirely sufficient.
Mr.. KNowLroN hoped he had no desire TO
enact a punishment which should be out of
proportion to the crime, or which should al
low any one to charge him with a retrograde
mos ement in this respect, but he could hard.
ly conceive of man who could commit
greater crime than wilfully and maliciously
placing distractions upon railroad for the
purpose of the destruction of persons and
property. We follow the man convicted Of
such a crime, TO prison, and see him there in
solitary confinement, and think it is dread
| full thing. But follow those persons to their
houses who are manned for lite, and who are
obliged to suffer everything on account of
this mans crime. He believed that a man
could stand sixty days solitary confinement
and not become insane. He also commended
that the severer the penalty is, the better
effect 1t will have in deterring others from the
commission of q like offence. He did not
believe that penalty was SO severe that a
risk Q mans getting clear on account of this
penalty, if there was evidence enough to JUS
tify conviction.
Mr.. VINToN again spoke, saying he was
in favor of the bill with the exception of the
provision for solitary confinement.
Mr. MOWER said that the enormity of the
guilt of an individual that would place OBJ
structions on railroads and in that way con-
| templating wholesale murder, was great, and
there was no punishment that he could con-
ceive of, too severe. He was plain farmer
and it was embarrassing for him to enga ge in
debate, but the lawyers were used to the bus
mess and had faculty of making wrong
appear all right But he thought that good
common sense in legislature was as good
thing as lawyer. He replied to some of the
arguments advanced by the gentleman from
Rockland (Mr. Mortland) He thought our
general government little lenient when they
let JEFF. Davis 90 free. He had done murder
on large scale. In regard to this wholesale
murder on q small scale, some of the lawyers
thought the penalty ought to be severe. His
opinion was that no punishment was too Sc
we're, and any man that would do it had not
ought to live on this planet which we inhab-
it. He maintained that solitary confinement
was merciful pro vision in the bill. Instead
Of depriving the man of his reason, 1t wotiid
be the very thing to restore it, having entirely
lost it before the commission of the crime.
Mr.. MoRTLAND replied to the gentleman
from Greene (Mr. Mower,) and said he was
in favor of the bill with the exception of the
provision for solitary confinement The
gentlemen (Mr. Mower must have lived in
the last century, and had brought down with
him the ideas of that time, when the, whip
ping post was in vogue.
Mr.. MOWER replied. He was an old man.
He had desired to come to the Legislature
long before this, but his constituents had de-
cided that he was not mature enough.
daughter and applause.)
The debate was further continued by
Messrs. Remission, Mortland, Nash, Vinton,
Iotman, Reed, Mower, King, Alley and FL.
lis.
The House voted to suspend the rules, and
reconsider the vote passing the bill to be en-
crossed.
Mr.. NASH then offered his amendment to
strike out the provision for solitary contine-
ment, and on its adoption, the yeas and nays
were ordered and taken, on motion of MIR. |
HAYES, resulting in the negative, as follows
YEAs;-Messrs. Bailey, Barron, Boardman, Brew. |
or, CARL, Cary, Coburu, Cushman, Cutting Den.
nison, Dmgley, Fessenden, Folsom of Oldtown,