Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1883-06-16
A Strange Problem.

SATURDAY EVENING. JUNE 10. 1883.
A Strange Problem.
Col. Mcclure ought to give leave OF
absence for the summer to the soft
headed young man who comes to such
remarkable conclusions about the muir
der of Dukes and is permitted to express
them editorially in the Times. The
young man is intelligent enough to re-
cognize the fact that the killing Of Dukes
comes clearly within the definition of
murder, because Mutt, as he says, d" de-
liberately stood IN the path of Dukes
he deliberately fired five bullets at him
with deadly intent he did it without
sudden provocation." And that is mur
der in the FIRST degree, under the Penn
sylvania statute. 1t ought to follow
that an editor, who describes crime as
murder in the first degree, would call
for the conviction of the criminal and
for his execution, unless there are palll
Ating circumstances in the Offense which
would justify executive clemency. But
this editor, after recognizing the killing
of Dukes as murder, leaps squarely about,
and not only says that !" the result OF
the trial will be an acquittal of the muir
der of fathers murderer; but he de
clares that "looking the facts in the
face, there is no other possible solution
of the fearful problem 1t is not sur
prising that he should anticipate the
acIuittal of Mutt the very remarkable
thing is that public journal of standing
should say that there is no possible sOu-
tion of the problem involved in the
trial of a man whom it admits has
perpetrated deliberate murder, but
to acquit him.
Naturally it would seem that there
would be no other correct solution OF
that :" problem possible, but to convict.
The logical argument is that the man
being conceded to have perpetrated what
the law describes as murder in the first
degree, must be convicted of that ofenSe.
The Times argument runs that though
the man has done murder yet he must
be acquitted. Ttat, of course, is silly
talk. 1t would not be silly for anyone to
50 declare who acknowledged at the
same time that he spat upon the law. 1t
would in him only be lawless, desperate
spirit. calling on him to despite the law.
But tie man is fool of the very first
water who pronounces Il crime to be
murder and, protesting to respect the
law, yet denies that it imperatively calls
for the conviction of the criminal 10y
the jury. The Times soft headed young
man has grace enough to call it a
''fearful problem" that he is considering
He evidently feels the embarrassment at
tending a declaration that what is un
doubtedly murder should not be punish
ed as murder. 1t is quite difficult
statement for d public journal to max e
for it ought to talk good sense and coun
sci obedience to the law. The majority
of journalists have, however, a strong
inclination to talk in accord with what
they consider to be the sympathies O
their readers. Hence probably come Thu
troubles of the Times, young man. HI:
sense tells him that Mutt murdered
Dukes but his sensibilities inform hin
that, notwithstanding, tho public sen
timent in the Nuts community viii
not let him be hung. He is right il
both apprehensiOns but he falls whel
he attempts to defend the public senti
ment which would acquit Mutt. 1t is
indefensible and the editor who doe
his duty will boldly say SO and denounce
it. We should not yield to apubli'
sentiment that we think wrong. Ii i
is true that this sentiment will no
demand the conviction of Mutt, though
he be clearly guilty of murder, then tin
sentiment of the public is wrong and i
is the duty Of its teachers among whom
the editor stands, to preach against i
and correct it.