New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-09-04
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.

The American Social Science Association be-
can its ANIMAL session yesterday at Saratoga.
The subject of the opening address by the
President. Professor Wayland, of the YALE
law School. was "Capital Punishment"
Without pretending to advance any new argu'
ments' on this wel-wOrn theme he has resfated
the old ones in fresh and interesting manner
which makes the address quite readable. lie
omits entirely tho argument which has been so
often used. and sometimes with much force, by
the opponents of capital punishment that no
abstract right resides in the State to punish the
taking of life by the taking of life that what
is crime in the individual Is no less crime in the
mass of individuals in organized society.
Leaving out of view the ethical and humanita-
rion considerations, the subject 10 discussed
simply as question of social order and neces-
sity. 1t being commonly assumed that society
has the right to protect life, liberty ana prop
erty by the adoption of any measures best
fitted to secure that end, = the sole consider
| alton with which the legislator has to deal IL
y the simple inquiry, What kind or degree OF
| punishment will most eflectually !rotect
society from the consequences OF crme1 T.
With this preliminary statement OF limlta-
tops TO tho scope of the discussion, lie under
takes to show by argument and from status
tics that the death penalty-being viewed with
aversion by the growing intelligence OF the
people; being so far out OF harmony with pub
lie sentiment that with rare exceptions Juries
refuse to enforce it; and having obviously
failed to afford protection to human life by act
ing As deterrent from the commission OF the
crime of murder-shOuld he repealed. These
several positions he fortifcs at considerable
length with statistics derived chiefly from the
criminal annals of Massachusetts and Connect
cut. IL must be said that while the argument
of the address on this score is plausibly pre-
sented it will have to he admitted that it is lar
from conclusive. The substitute proposed for
the death penalty is of course life imprisonment
with notifications of the conditions suited to
the circumstances of the crime. In considering
this feature Professor Wayland has very Tore
IDLY stated the difference between the effect OF
the two penalties as deterrents from crime
Ills conclusion is that while the lessons taught
nv the gallovs are short-li @the prisoner
for life breaches from his lonely cell daily
sermon TO deter from crime" There Is no
Groom hero for mock heroism or bravado.
- There is no spectacle there are no spectators.
In view of the fact that comparatively few
life sentences are literally executed, very
large proportion OF such criminals being par
doned upon one pretext and another the question
naturally arises in this relation: How can the
sliteral execution of n life sentence be IN
sured ~ Professor Wayland ventures this
answer: sBy n constitutional provision max
| q ing release from confinement impossible until
abeforc the court in which the'prisoner was con-
| u yicted il shall be made to appear that he was
ainnocent" 1t is an open question whether in
practice this would be an improvement upon
existing Boards of Pardons or upon reposinG
the pardoninc power in the Legislature or Ex-
ecutive. The question of capital punishment IL
one of the most interesting problems in social
science, and Professor Wayland's address is An
| important addition to the literature OF the
| subject.