Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1876-03-23
False Morals.


In conversation with friend a few
DAYS ago, he stated that after consider
! able experience with men who evade
law when they can. or who often vio-
late a law which exacts the penalty of
fine only, he had learned that the
well-nigh universal opinion is that
there is no moral wrong in the evasion
or violation of law, il the penalty.
can he cancelled by money. Here is
/ law that stands in the way of illicit
gain. perhaps through whisky frauds.
OF any kind of frauds on the govern
ment or State, cities, counties, town.
ships, or private corporations. But
suppose that for the violation of this
law, no more than money penalty is
exacted. Then the violator takes the
risk. If he is not detected in fraud,
he has gained so much more money
than i'm legitimate business. If he
is detected, he pays a part, or al, or
more than all his gains, and the ac-
count is square. No wrong is done.
and he is as morally pure as though all
his business had been done on the
strictest principles of honesty. This
heing the case the remedy is obvious.
: tits to make Imprisonment part of
the penalty i'm all eases. But it is not
to the greater efficacy of imprisonment
as a preventive of crime, especially ia
the case of wealthy offenders. that We
now wish To call attentions; rather to
the low and false standard of morals
which would seem to prevail. That no
offenSe which may he condoned with
ing view. for under it, criminal acts are
only a species of gambling, in which
the stakes are concealment on the one
hand, and exposure on the other. If
the offender wins by keeping his offense
concealed, he is the gamer to the
amount Of the returns of his Illicit
practices: hut if he loses. by an expo
sure. the fine assessed is but debt, and
he regards himself free from all wrong
doing so far as the morality of the
| transaction is concerned. Ii is quite
probable that this was the view which
actuated the producers of crooked
whisky" especially if We connect with
it another view which we alluded Ia in
recent article. that many persons will
not scruple tn swin,ile corporation or
a government, when they would lie
strictly honest as between man and
man. The makers of the crooked"
scarcely contemplated the penitentia-
~ i'll the distance; they supposed a
heavy pecuniary penalty would he the
worst they should have IL undergo in
the event of exposure. OF course we
do not include here the government
officers, for they had solemn trust.
bound 10y the sanctions of an oath, to
fulfill.
But the whole idea is erroneous.
The morality If Il transaction lies farth-
or back than law. Moral right and
wrong have their bounds and limita-
tions wholly independent of human IN
actments. Such offences as under the
law WE call bribery, and swindlin1.
and every dishonest practice. wherein
anything is represented to be what it is
not. or that involves any d cept:on by
which innocent parties suffer. whether
practised rs between man and man. or
by individuals towards the government
are all wrong, and would be wrong. if
there was no written law known among
men. The law-making power of a
state or nation may take any OF those
wrongs. and place them in the catalogue
of crimes and misdemeannrs so as to i'll
flict penalty in case they are committed;
but the morality, the element Of wrong
was in them just rs much before as af-
ter the enactment. Law Is designed Ia
he legal expression for right and
wrong in human actions, and in gencr-
al. to violate law is to- commit a NOR
al wrong. And no man has the moral
right to consider himself innocent lncre-
ly because he can settle the pun
ishment with money He has COM
mitted an offense. He has done Il
wrong; and though tl:e disgrace of inn
prisnnnent may MT follow. none tie
less has he done that which deserves
punishment. Any other view is de-
moralizing. and must lead tn constant
evasions and violations Of the laws of
the land