Morning journal and courier., 1883-09-04
aqnruzI arlS Galrrier.
AND pUBI.1sHED BY
SINGLE COPIES THREE GENTS.
Tuesday. September 4, 1888.
oAeTTAL PUNISHMENT.

CAE1yAL
 In his address yesterday before the Ameri-
 can Social Science Association, of which he is
 president, Professor Wayland of this city
 undertook to settle agreat question-namely,
 how to protect society without hanging
 people. or course nothing very new can be
 said upon this subject, but Professor Way
 lands statements and reasoning are entitl ed
 to attention.
 He thinks that he ia warranted in conclud-
 ing that with the growing intelligence of a
 free people there arises an increasing aver
 sion to capital punishment; that, in the
 words of Sydney Smith, 'tthe efficient maxi
 mum of punishment is not what the legisla-
 ture chooses to enact, but what the great
 mass of the people think that maximum
 ought to be;" and that whenever penalty
 is so far out of harmony with public senti- ment that with rare exceptions juries refuse to enforce it, the time has arrived for it's re- peal. These conclusions narrow the discus- sion of the death penalty to the simple ques- ton of expedency. The inquiry is then made whether in our. times and in this coun- try capital punishment is so enforced as to afford adequate protection to human life. As aids to this inquiry reliable facts from two States (not second to any in the Union for general intelligence, respect for law and love for social order) namely, Massachusetts and Connecticut are cited. !. In Massachusetts during the years from 1860 to 1882, both i'm elusive (omitting all cases which were not actually passed upon by juries), there were one hundred and seventy trials for murder in the first degree. Twenty-nine persons were convicted of the crime as charged. Twelve of the twenty-nine had their death sentences commuted to imprisonment for life. Six teen of the seventeen whose sentences were not commuted were hung, and one committed suicide before the day fixed for the execution. In twenty six cases yer diets of murder in the second de- gree were rendered. In Connecticut during the thirty years from January l, 1850, to January 1, 1880, ninety-seven per- sons were tried for murder in the first de- gree. Thirteen were convicted of murder in the first degree. In six of the cases the sen- tence was commuted to imprisonment for life. Seven were executed. Forty-two were convicted of murder in the second de- gree. Seven were acquitted on the sole ground of insanity.
 From these and other facts Professor Way land concludes that the death penalty is net so enforced in our times and country az to afford adequate protection to human life Of course the only substitute which the professor can suggest for this unenforced penalty is impris- oument for life. This, he thinks, would &C., complish that which the death penalty is intended to accomplish -incapacitate the criminal from repeating his crime, and dster others from committing like offense. Con- corning the deterrent effect of imprisonment prisoned only with murderers) he says: ''To others his punishment is 8 standing menace; Q perpetual warning. The lessons taught by the gallows are short lived. The man dies and is forgotten. But the prisoner for life breaches from his lonely cell daily sermon to deter from crime Again, the deterrent influence of this form of penalty will be ma terially enhanced by the greatly increased of conviction after detection and of punishment after conviction. From the when it is made to appear that pOSS1Dl6 M1BEak6 IS not 1rFeparaDles brlalS TOT murder will be deprived of their anomalous and exceptional features" To insure the literal execution of life sentences the profess or would have a constitutional provision. making release from confinement impossible, until, before the court in which the prisoner was convicted, it shoud be made to appear that he was innocent.
 All this is plausible and in accordance with the humane spirit of the times. But that for life would cause decrease in capital crimes is doubtful, and there are not facts enough to serve as the basis for an intelligent decision of the question. Our own opinion is that there will be about as many murders under one plan ss the other. and that neither hanging nor imprisonment for life has strong deterrent effect upon But when we have neither hang ing or imprisonment for life, as has generally been the case lately in this State, murders may fairly be expected not to decrease in number.