The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1883-04-19

UA4OoS 1AOoO11CJC ehAS 'S''N'
1 am opposed to capital punishment.
Notwithstanding you have on your
side age, experience and ability, |
would ask you to show why you think
it right morally, politically and relig-
iously, and allow me to answer your
argument in the order in which it is
advanced. Respectfully &C.,
J. F. WHITE.
P. S. Please do not think me ega-
tistic-I am after information.
J.F. W.
REMARKS BY D. MACKLEY.
| think it ri ght morally to put
man to death for murder, because the
terror caused by the certainty of death
is the only thing that will operate to
deter certain savage natures from
committing murder, and it is better
morally to have murder checked by
process of law than by mob violence,
and the individuals composing society
will, in one way or another, protect
themselves from the murderer. To
illustrate. In DIR. Whites own coun-
ty, Lawrence, DIR. Gates poisoned his
wife, in order to get a little money
which she had in her own right. A
jury acquitted him. A year or two
afterwards, the Judge announced from
the bench, that since the last term of
the Court, there had been six hom-
icides in Lawrence county. A man
was murdered on his way home one
night, and his murderers were confined
in Jail. The people had the acquittal
of Gates in mind, and for self protec-
ton took one of the murderers out Of
Jail and hung him on a tree in the
Court House yard. Now if Gates had
been convicted and hung, it would no
doubt have saved at least half dozen
lives. Which would have been better
morally and politically, the hanging of
the murderer Gates, or the murder Of
half dozen innocent persons, and the
hanging Of a man in the night by a
mob?
I believe it is right religiously to
put a man to death for high crime,
because when God established per-
sonal government for a certain people,
he not only commanded said people to
punish the crime Of murder with
death, but numerous other crimes and
offenses; and under the much more
mild and merciful Christian dispensa-
ton, He punished with sure and sud
den death two persons for telling a
lie. Only think what would be the
result if all liars at the present day
should fall dead! How many persons
would be left?
I am well acquainted with the argu-
ment that imprisonment for life pre-
vents the murderer from repeating his
crime. 1t is a poor argument. In
the first place, murders have been
committed by criminals while in
prison. The object of punishment is
not revenge, or to prevent the same
criminal from repeating the crime;
but it is to deter evil doers. If every
man who contemplates murder, or
commences to get drunk, could be
reasonably certain that if he should
take human life, death-speedy and
sure and certain death would be his
fate, would he not pause and consider?
When Peter Becker got drunk and
murdered James Brady in Jackson,
and escaped the gallows because he
was so drunk that he was incapable
of deliberation and premeditation, he
believed that he would be pardoned
out of the penitentiary in less than q
year. He urged me to write to Gov.
Foster in his behalf, and he seemed to
have no doubt whatever that he
would be free in a very short time.
From the history Of the past, he had
good grounds for such hope. Had he
been hung, the next savage rufian
who wanted to get drunk and parade
the streets with a shotgun on his
shoulder and a revolver in his pocket
might have been little careful how
many 'peers" he took at the Dutch
"blaces of peesness' in jackson.
Suppose Jackson's sentence should
be commuted to imprisonment for
life. Does any one believe that he
would remain in the Penitentiary ten
years2 Joseph Gang, in Portsmouth,
got drunk, got into fight, stabbed a
man, who, after days Of agony died.
Gang was convicted and sentenced to
the Penitentiary for ten years. Last
week Gov. Foster turned him out, be-
fore he had served three years Of his
sentence! The papers state that the
Prosecuting Attorney, and even the
Judge who sentenced him, urged the
Governor to turn him loose!
1t will not do. Murderers and other
criminals must be punished according
to law, or society must resolve itself
back to original barbarism, and every
man must take the law into bis own
hands. Which will be better,
morally, politically and religiously?
The Secretary of State gave the
Judicial Amendment to the Register
for publication and the Liquor