Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1883-02-22

know, not one single petitioner asked for it
Is there any Of that restless feeling of appre-
hension abroad among the people of the
State which the advocates of capital punish
ment picture in such glowing colors? 1t
may be that in the retired part OF
the State where dwell. did not
have the opportunity to feel the public
pulse throb as strongly as did some
of my honorable associates on the Judiciary
Committee. Yet must assert that the first
intimation had that the matter was even to
be discussed, was the Introduction of the or
der in the House calling attention to the sub
Ject. Still. am not one of those who claim
that the legislature cannot pass reasonable
laws without long petitions for their enact
ment, and only allude to the absence of
petitions as an evidence that there WAS no
great feeling of insecurity abroad in the land.
Having thus shown you INV position, which is
thaonothing but necessity will justify the
taking of human life, and that there exists at
the present time no such necessity as will
warrant a return to the death penalty. let me
for moment step down from that position
and meet the advocates of this measure on
the ground of expediency. In so doing, | do
not for a moment admit that we are justified
in considering it from that standpoint. The
sanctity of human life should never be in
Naueu "" ueIe qusstoH vi eNPeuieucN' put
claim their position Is untenrble on their
own ground. Their claim Is that the death
penalty will deter more people from the COM
mission of murder than imprisonment for
life. If it was proposition susceptible of
mathematical demonstration, l would join
issue with them on that poipt. But
1t Is simply an attempt to weigh
and analyze the motive power in a mans
mind and deduce therefrom u certain
rule OF action-a tar held OF argument, but
not OF demonstration The supporters of
capital punishment attempt to prove by
hgures that murders increase when the pun
ishment Is Imprisonment for life, and will
give you statistics, which from their stand
point, viewed only with the limitations which
they throw about them might seem TO add
some force to their argument. On the other
hand the opponents OF the measure will sub
stantiate the opposite of this by equally con
vincing statistics. when viewed from their
stand point They both make the erroneous
assumption that the frequency or infrequen'
ey OF crime depends solely upon the severity
or laxlty of the punishment inflicted. That
doctrine once admitted and 1t would follow
as matter of course that We only had 10
keep increasing the severity of the punish
ment to finally stamp out entirely the crime
OF murder. Following TO its logical conclu-
sion this claim of expediency, If 1t is eNpe-
dent to enact the death penalty TO deter
Others from committing the crime OF murder.
and this fails in any degree of accomplishing
the object, 1t is equally expedient to enact
that the forfeited life be taken in more cruel
form and manner with view to accomplish
the same end. Having once invaded the
sanctity of human life without actual neces-
sity, | concede that the manner OF
taking the forfeited life may be
settled by the expectancy of the
case III hanging does not do the Job, try
cruclhXlon, boiling IN oil, burning at the
stake. We have precedents for them all.
Notwithstanding all the figures and statistics
given you to prove that If this measure passes
there will be an immediate reduction in the
number OF murders committed in this State,
l venture the assertion that from the exrer-
fence of the past years, from the time when in
England the death penalty was inflicted for
"'c'e '""" o'e "u"'ieu . une"oes' e'en 'oi 'ne
Zinc u ''."'i,s o"e snn,i"e' up W ,"e pre-
en'' "hen .he uea.' Pe"a,'y IS en'ireiy aooi-
lsueu III our o~n ota'e' .lla' no 'iuer OF saier
rune mas pee" ueu"ceu 'nan ''ia' ~ no. 'ne
So ou' ."s '"'y vi punishment
'.:on '.o"' w. .o"' ,,,, Vi e'in,e
~. aa. s W y. US suo:'u nav my
t u e. "a e.e'"y VIM. - necessary 10
he.',ss E..; o @ ".''.,, s'".
,.'' ."'.' VIC e"'"o,
o.. " ""'
40, ~, 81 .,. ~. nv. ~ '"es. sen.ie
'"." Pu. i1i VI 'ou". W '.euie ''e ies'oi" ',o"
~ VIC Ian as VI seu asa,ns' I've "oo-
~ ioi "a" VI us "u"uier ui"eie"' Vi
tI:'. W :. aPf"e. ~ ,o,''ei .,"i''
'.p'".' '''e m"'e '"ic' ="
,,, vi rug " cu'"p'e ,'e en.o"ey u. the
,;cA =: ~. VIC. O. .... ~
~. y" w n o'"es no.' .o"'ani',ins .'e
.n'. y, "u' al. "p' W oe''ooN wy
e.ei, 10y ing IT, a;a':s S'as.;n ou ~;
Ia.;,sd J;.,a.;,;o,, ~ al ,;sa .', ,,'n -;
auaa,,,a IS 49, o.. a., a" r, i;r
49, II may use SUI" WIN arc '''-
' III ,.u.,
lily "e ""o ".'ne 1'en soleiy y" .i.c
s.ounu y, i.a' " ~, 'ele' as restraining III,
nuenIe, s'ai'' wiz. ~, elioneous PROMISES anu
VIZ. W. "'e III ''"e" "' e'i'"eou' 'o"'
''"s'o"
Even II we ADMIT 1or moment that the
terror OF death Is trlhe more effcacious IN
deterrihg from crime tnah lie imprisonment,
sun the ueath pehaity mas Two disadvantages
, ~ nc" a"s ian
a.. 20 'srso,',;r "". III 70 ' ,,' uH'u'
.,,o.p.;"o b.. son,h ca H. ,.;.a. &c ~
'.;",ad H. H. n.,,'r.i p e IN ,,,s
49,. -. wy ~ VIC
Nv. "II -. aa,;,., ta a., o"s' ..,'
Re. a. ;..;.,a,;rr. ;na., -
i, ,..rn;nn ,ha;r ;n5anan,s Thus ';sh
" P'"S pans"