The Rutland weekly globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1873-07-11
8ntlana ateekIy Glube.
THE UNCERTAINTY OF THE
SENTENCE.

upon rIhuh IL Noi"NiHt ~
Judge Davis, for the murder of his father
Mansfield Tracy Walworth. 1t will be
borne In mind, in what we have to say,
that, although the conviction was only for
murder in the second degree-in accordance
with distinction made by recent statute |
of New York-yet that the jury, in truth |
and in fact, found the accused guilty of
wilful, deliberate, malicious, premeditated
murder. In nearly, if not every other
state in the Union, and In every civilized
nation upon the face of the earth, the YER
dict, or, rather, the finding of the facts,
which they must have found, would have
been simply guilty of murder, and carried
with it, as penalty, the sacrifice of life.
If the crime had been committed only five
days earlier, even in New York, with the
facts as established by the jury, the penalty
would have been hanging. The only dis
tinction between the two grades OF murder
being in the degree of delberation. Under
the old law, and under the law as it is in
Vermont it was only necessary that delib-
Grafton should precede the shooting, and
this may, sometimes,be fine point, as Re
cordcr Hackett explained in the Sharkey
case, by saying that the thoughts of some
men move as rapidly as light, while in
wave of the latter there are five hundred
billions in a second From this illustration
it may he seen how yne act may, in real
r pit,ttl-
taneous. Now, as the law is, and as it was
when Walworth committed his crime,
there must be only such deliberation as will
not and cannot appear simultaneous. If,
therefore, Walworth had murdered his
father, for murder him he did, on the 2Sth
day of May, instead of the 3D. day of June,
Judge Davis would have declared that his
life was forfeited to his country, and that
he must be changed by the neck" until he
was dead
If such had been the state of facts, would
there have been any hope of mercy held
out to Frank WalworthY Would Judge
Davis have taken any other view of his
Cast anu Clllnt llul tllul hlo lllO Ndo iOi
feited, and its sacrifice was demanded, not
so much as punishment, but as a warning
and example to his fellow men! We know
Governor Dix well enough to feel assured
that no hopes could have reasonably been
entertained at his hands. His Roman
firmness, in this class of cases, has more
than once been displayed, and he would,
doubtless, felt it his duty to see that the
laws were duly executed. He, and he
alone, as Governor, could have interfered.
AS the tragedy at its inception, and the
acting of the several parts were under his
administration, so would the curtain have
fallen upon the final act, before its close.
What different spectacle is now disclosed!
We do not intend to find fault with the
verdict of the jury, or the actual sentence
of the court-under the verdict, the utmost
penalty of the law was invoked. But here
is young man, "Clothed in his right mind,
found guilty of the crime of homicide.
That homicide was the killing of father
by his son. There is no excuse, palliation
or justification for the act, yet Judge Davis,
in pronouncing the sentence of the courts
tells him-the convict-that he has hopes
of escape from life time of confinement
in states prison, sat some future day
through executive clemency." The tele-
gram, which contains the text of the sen
tence, further along, and at its close con
tains these significant words: "Mr. O'Con
or, it is said, is trying to induce the sheriff
to leave Walworth in the Tombs for few
days, that he may apply to the Governor
for pardon"
Right here we desire to make point
and interpose an inquiry. Hanging fo
murder may or may not be played out
under this new statute of New York
Capital punishment may be right or wrong
Whether it is the one or the other, we de-
not intend here and now to consider. |
is the great uncertainty of the duration
and extent of punishment that does anC
must exist, with the absolute or practica
abolition of capital punishment, leaving
the laws, otherwise, as they now are, t.
which we desire to call attention. In thi
very Walworth case, Judge Davis intimat
ed to this boy murderer-as romance will
call him-that he ought to have been hung
His words were 81 have fearful doubts i
1.-THE testimony in the case-would no
have justified verdict of murder in tn,
- first degree, for cannot conceive wha
motives you could have had in pre-
pairing yourself as you did
except upon the idea that you had de
" liberately determined that his life SHOULD
=" be terminated by your hands" This il
the language of the learned and impartia
judge, who held the scales of justice equal
ly poised during the trial, not any word
of ours. Thinking this, believing this, ut
tcring these words to one whose "horribl,
deed" he "shuddered to think of" anC
whom, if the jury had rendered such
verdict as he thought and believed they
should have done, he would have SENTENCED
to meet his death at an early day, withou
hope of human mercy, he yet, when pro
nouncing the mitigated penalty of the Law
for lesser grade of crime, holds out hope
of executive clemency, If Judge Dav
was correct in his Fearful doubts"-anC
very few will hesitate to say that he wal
not correct-or if the jury were right il
their verdict and outside of very small
circle of intimate personal friends who's
minds are swayed by love and Pffection, al
will coincide in the belief that one or tn,
other view was correct there never wa
or can be case so little deserving of elem
ency Yet in the very inhiction of TIN
penalty, its force, effect and potency as
warning and example is destroyed by it
uncertainty. If so impassive judge, a
Nnah na.ic nn.. La az. u...a.....l L. ---