New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-06-30

doned in the debates OF the House upon the
question, rs well as the argument based upon
the idea of vengeance. He also gave some
instructive and interesting historical details
A friend of his remembered having, when
schoolb0y, been taken, with the other lads
to witness all the executions in the neghbor-
hood, after which the schoolmaster would lee
ture them upon the awful fate which wonld
probably befall boys who were guilty OF pill
fcring or OF telling lies.
Not more than 20 years ago about 100
oifcnses were punishable with death. NOT
much later the executions were ten times more
numerous, in proportion to the population, IN
London than in Amsterdam. Charles Wesley
on one occasion preached tho condemned ser
mon to about 20 criminals, while 20 Others
were to suffer in the following week. LORD
ElcnbOr0ugh spoke in the House OF Lords
against the bill abolishng capital punishment
in cases Of shoplifting, and il was rejected, 81
votes to. IL, while seven bishops and arch
bishops voted in the majority. Mr.. Bright
declared that while there had been diminu-
ton of the barbarity of the laws, there had
also been a dIminution in the frequency OF
crimes to which the punishment of death
is attached as penalty; and he likewise
thought that the deterrent influence of hanging
had been greatly Overratcd. In from twelve
to twenty States capital punishment had been
abolished and no increase Of crime had iol-
lowed. The English criminal law had always
been more severe and cruel than that OF any
other Christian country. Nor did he think
that the cxpedient of private executions had
been successful, for, in his opinion, they were
cxerting a more evil influence upon the public
mind than they did when they occurred under
the canopy of heaven, and in the face OF thou
sands of people. A Parliament, he predicted,
was coming which would value Christian law
above IL relic of barbarism, and with his heart
and soul he gave his voice for the motion.
This debate has Occasloned good deal OF
comment in the English newspapers. Perhaps
the strongest point Is made against the sub
of life imprisonment for the death
penalty. What is to prevent, 1t IL asked, the
prisoner from numbering his jallcrf No pun
ishmcnt can be inflicted upon HIM which has
not already been inflicted The Labor to which
he il condemned il now severe and painful
how can it. be made more so 7 Public opinion
would not tolerate torture or any other brutal
punishment. The number Of prisoners would
be increased by the addition OF those who are
now hanged. The rccklessness and rage OF
all of them would be increased in proportion
The acrs must trust TO their weapons for
safety, and If they shot their prisoners we
should only have capital punishment i'll an
other form.
To our readers there will be nothing novel
in these arguments and suggestions, for the
question of capital punishment has for many
years been thoroughly debated in the United
States. IL is no longer SO much discussed AZ
formerly because, we suppose, the current OF
public opinion is against any radical change in
existing laws. These, however, have been
from time to time amelorated, and hardly
anywhere in this country is death the penalty
of any crime less than that of murder III the
first degree. Here, for obvious reasons. our
has paused in great majority OF
the States; nor il any general and immediate
change to be reasonably expected.