Morning journal and courier., 1881-11-17
Thursda Morning, Nov. 17, 1881.
 THE DEATH PENALTY.

Thursda Morning, Nov. 17, 1881.
 THE DEATH PENALTY.
 There is a very interesting 'ssymposium', in the current number of the North Ame1isan
 ReoieaO. Its subject is ''The Death Penalty" and those who take part in it are Rev. Dr. Cheever, Judge Samuel Hand and Wendell Phillips. Dr. Cheever and Judge Hand de- fend the death penalty and Wendell Phillips
 argues against it. The gist of Dr. Cheevers
 argument is contained in the following 'The
 law of God says to the criminal, Become
 murderer and you are lost. The abolition of
 the penalty says, Murder, and you are saved.
 The removal of the dreaded penalty holds
 out an inducement so diabolical to the high
 est crime that it seems incredible that any
 humane form of socialism should entertain it
 for moment. You may save your own life,
 it says, by killing the witnesses against you.
 You can only be imprisoned. even if you kill;
 but if any one tries to kill you, you have the right to kill him. You may even escape com demnation, if tried, by the plea of sudden in-
 sanity, into which the threat of death and the
 you. God proposes to abolish the
 crime; man to abolish the penalty. God
 seeks our deliverance from sin; man our
 evasion of it's consequences. Self government
 under God is heaven. Self government with
 out God is anarchy and hell.'' Judge Hand
 thinks the question of capital punishment one not of power, but of justice and expe-
 diency. He believes that the death penalty
 is necessary. justifable and expedient, and
 should be retained.
 The most notable contribution is that of
 Wendell Phillips. and he supports his side of
 the question with great skill. MT. Phillips
 thinks it cannot be denied that New England
 and the States planted by her sons pun
 ish murder with death chiefly be- cause men believe they are ordered so to do by the Old Testament, in the verse of Genesis usually translated stWhoso she'd deth mans blood by man shall his blood be shed" MT. Phillips thinks this verse is nothing more than prohibition of cannibal- ism and that the usual translation is ques- tionable. He says: ''Call this equivocal verse in Genesis a warrant from the Al mighty Why, county sheriff would not arrest sheep thief on so ambiguous war rant" If this verse'is @ command that every murderer shall die, he thinks it remarkable that neither did he who gave it conform to it nor did any of the creatures obey it in the most striking instances of murder that have taken place. "Cain was a murderer at a time when the idea of murderer at large and unrestrained, in a world with very few inhabitants, must have been fearful. Yet God allowed him to live. Lamech, also murderer before the flood, was spared. After the flood, Moses, murderer, was admitted to the immediate presence of the Highest, and David, the most atrocious of nurderers, was still the sweet psalmist of Israel, dying in 'a good old age, full of days, riches and honor Indeed, all the great murderers in Jewish history-Absalom, Simeon, Levi and the rest-did not have their blood she'd but died in battle or in their beds" Having proved to his own satisfaction that the di vine law does not make capital punishment necessary, and that human governments do not possess the right to take human life MT. Phillips proceeds to argue that capital pun ishment is not absolutely necessary for the protection of society in almost any epoch of civilization. He considers this proved by the amplest testimony. Egypt, for fifty years during the reign of Sabacon; Rome for two hundred and fifty years: Tuscany for more than twenty-five years; Russia for twenty years of the reign of Elizabeth and substantially during the reign of her successor, Catherine Sir James Macintosh in India for seven years; the State of Rhode Island since 1852; Michigan since 1947; Wisconsin Maine since 1885 {; l Holland since 1870; Saxony since 1868 Bel gium since 1881; and several other | States, prove, by their experience, that life and property are safer with no death penalty threatened or inflicted, than in the | neighboring countries which still use the death penalty. The evidence is ample and the demonstration perfect; the plea that this | fearful penalty is necessary is no longer ad- | missible. Facts annihilate it's foundations. 1 And observe that every such experiment has succeeded. The weight of this evidence is | not lessened by the necessity of balancing | some failures against other successes. All the tracks lead one way. And if not abso | lutely necessary, the death penalty must be extremely injurious"
 Mir. Phillips cites the words of Dr. William Euefy Cnann1nS when reQ6cG now | much of the responsibility for crime rests on the State, how many of the offences which | are most severely punished are to be traced | to neglected education, to early squalid want, 1 to temptations and exposures which society | might do much to relieve, feel that spirit | of mercy should temper legislation that we | should not sever ourselves so widely from | our fallen brethren; that we should recog- | nize in them the countenance and claims of | humanity that we should strive to win them back to God" And he concludes his bril- | liaut and powerful argument with the follow ing plea for Guiteau: 'sThis pitiabIe and | misbegotten wreck, who is only just within, if indeed he be within, the limits of moral | responsibility, and who could not probably | be proved the direct cause of the Presidents | death to the satisfaction of any jury as- | sembled one year or twenty months hence,-l if, carried away by hot revenge, the people | hang him, it will be blot on the justice of | the American people which, probably within | five years, men would do anything to erase, and which history will record as one of the | most lamentable instances of temporary mad | ness or as evidence how much of actual bar. | and so-called Christian community" What ever may be thought of Mr. Phillips conclu- i sions there is no denying hiss ability and | courage.