The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1883-12-13
[Macmillan's Magazine.1
PROPERTY VERSUS PERSON.
inequality of Sentences.


There is no subject of more lmpor-
tance to the public than the mode in
which the criminal law is administer
ed. Upon the mode of its administra-
ton, and it's effect upon the criminal
classes, the comfort, peace, and secu-
rity Of the public largely depend.
Public attention has been lately drawn
to the subject by the apparent increase
of savage, and often unprovoked as
saults upon peaceful persons going
about their avocations in the streets
Having long felt that some change
was needed, either in the law, or the
way in which it was administered, |
addressed questions, in the House Of
Commons during last session, to the
home secretary, calling his attention
to some glaring cases where almost
nominal punishments were inflicted
upon ruffians for outrages of a most
brutal character. Towards the end of
the session | moved a resolution upon
the subject contrasting the punish
ments awarded for assaults upon the
person with the sentences passed upon
criminals for attacks upon property.
[ endeavored to show, and [ think
succeeded in showing, that in the first
class Of cases they were often, indeed
generally, entirely inadequate, while
in the second they were almost uni
formly excessive. Il this statement
is true, and | am sure that it is sub
stantially so, it follows, that in the
eye of the law, and in the minds Of its
administrators, property is more sa-
cred than person or even life. con-
tended that drunkenness should not
be allowed as plea in mitigation of
punishment, except in very rare and
extraordinary circumstances. Finally
[ moved for a return Of the number
of outrages upon the person during
the last FIVE years, and the punish
ments awarded in each case. [ fear
that this return will show an increas-
ing number of such crimes, and if it
does, it will be due to the inadequacy
Of the punishments given by the po-
lice magistrates and others. If it
could be shown that the maximum
punishments permitted by the law
were generally given, then it would be
clear that the law itself was to blame
and not it's administrators. Perhaps
it is partly both, but before changing
the law it must first be shown that its
full power has been applied. do not
think that this is the case, for it often
happens that not tenth of the pun
ishment allowed by law is given. This
country has attained a most unenvia-
BILE notoriety for class Of crime but
little known in others. Brutal as
saults upon wives and women Of all
kinds are disgrace to the manhood
Of England, and it is high time that
the reproach should ce wiped out.
The home secretary was never able
to suggest any means by which pub
lie attention could be called to cases
Of manifest injustice. He always con-
tended that no person was competent
to say whether a sentence was ade-
quate or inadequate, unless he had
been present in court when the case
was tried, had heard all the evidence,
and had had an opportunity of study
ing the demeanor of the witnesses. If
this theory is true one the public is
indeed helpless and publicity useless.
[ contend, and I think most reasona-
BILE people will agree with me, that
when a person has been found guilty
by jury, a judge or magistrate, the
public is quite competent to say whe-
ther the punishment has been COM
to the offense, without hav-
ing heard a word of the evidence or
having seen one Of the witnessea. I
readily admit that the public is not
upon the mere report of
trial, to say whether the prisoner is
guilty or not guilty with the same
as a Judge or jury. But the
evidence having been sufficient to sat-
sfy the Judge and the jury any one is
to say whether the SEN
tence is fair one or an unfair one.
The home secretary argued, too, that
it was unreasonable to suppose that
Judges and magistrates were less hu-
name than the mover OF the resolu-
ton, and that, therefore, their judg-
ments should not be criticised.
The following cases will show the
with which brutal injury
can be inflicted upon the person, and
the terrible consequences to the Grim
inal when his crime has been the alb
straction of few pence or shillings
from the pocket or the till. The first
to which 1 ventured to call the atten-
ton of the home secretary last session
was the case Of a man named Hunt,
tried before Lord Coleridge on the
26th of May. This man was indicted
for the wilful murder of his wife. He
was seen chasing her over field, and
having thrown her down, kicked her
with his heavy boots either on the
head or the back Of the neck. The
woman never moved, and when re-
preached by some neighbors, he said
it ''served her right" She died almost
immediately, and when the police
came they found the prisoner calmly