Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1883-03-12
law will be swept from our statute books,
never again TO be restored.
Mr.. RUsT OF WALDO.

| MT. huSt >diu tnAt tHe Oil lDNplNSu
question of the gravest responsibility. Il
concerned the highest right. The right o.
| the individual to life and the right of tn,
government TO take life. The question
should be considered with that calmnrss and
| dignity which befitted its Importance. The
| party tocsin had been sounded Ii had been
predicted that if the republicans of the
legislature allowed the bill to pass they
would be held responsible bv the people, and
the democratic party would secure an ad-
vantage. As a member of the opposition
party he protested against the question being
dragged into party politics. He stood ready To
share the responsibility ofpassing the bill with
other members of whatever political party
to which they might belong. 1t was question
OF dealing with the highest crime known To
the laws, and all good citizens were concerned
that it should b. considered in the light of
the public good apart from any political
party considerations. While he accorded to
the opponents of the bill a sincere and
conscientious bias, he claimed the same for
himself.
Mr.. Rust hailed the return of a most
stalwart sentiment in regard to the crime of
murder. For more than a third of century,
he said the policy of the State had been die
tated by sentiment of tenderness and charity
for the murderer. The opposers of the death
penalty had been singing the dismal song o;
the horrors of the gallows and appealing to
the sensbilities of the people, till now mur-
der stalks abroad, and the public mind is fill
ed with alarm lie reviewed the policy for the
last 80 years. For nearly Il quarter of a
century previous to 1914, there had been but
two murders in this State. What had pro-
duced the great change: Murders were now
of almost monthly occurrence. The cause
sanp,pA fo him nlaiu nhnra fn
the former period NO division of public sent-
ment aS the punishment for murder. The
crime was regarded with the utmost horror
The murderer had no sympathizers. Justice
sat in judgment between him and his victim
and decreed that his life should paw the pen
atty, and that the gallows should be a warn
ing against the repetition OF the terrible crime.
and all the people said amen.
Mr.. Rust reviewed the several steps that
had been taken since to undermine that whole
some stalwart sentiment. First was the post
ponement of the execution of the murderer.
I}v this means the deterring effect of the pun
ishment upon the community was lost. The
cruel fate of the innocent victim gradually
lost its force upon the public mind. while the
active sympathizers with the murderer grad
ually impressed it with the horrors of the
gallows. Gradually the work of awakening
the public sentiment went on till finally the
death penalty was abolished. And what is
the spectacle to day? The crime of murder
is graded down to level of inferior crime !:
no longer does the fear of death at the hand
of the eXecutioner-the most powerful dis
suasion that can act upon the human mind
operate upon malicious, revengeful minds
to deter them. The solemn trials for murder
which impressed the people with a wholesome
fear of the crime, have now become solemn
farces the State prison is fast filling with
desperate murderers to the great danger of
the lives of its officers. and every man and
every woman who NAV have aroused the
anger or jealousy of some malicious. brutal
character trembles when they see him or hear
of his presence in their neghborhood.
In this condition of public alarm the rep
resentatives of the people are called upon to
devise some remedy for this frequent she'd
ding of blood. What if no petitions are pre-
sented; a voice louder than petitions rings in
their ears. But this voice is unheeded by
those who subscribe to an unwritten creed
of a certain religious denomination, and by
others who from long contempa.
ton OF the scenes at the gallows
have come to overlook justice and
the wholesome effects of punishment upon
the community. Their argument is that OF
imprisonment. According to them nothing fur
ther can be done. With expressions of indig
nation they demand if the gallows is to be
again erected in Maine. They deny the NOR
al right of the government to take the life of
the murderer, and they pteously portray the
anguish of the murderer and his relatives at
the prospect of his doom, and denounce cap
ital punishment as a relic of barbarism.
If their arguments are to be accepted,
then indeed there is no remedy. The peo-
pie of the State are at the mercy of class
of malicious characters, who solace them
selves with the sentiment that hanging is
PLAYED out in Maine, and at the worst they
will only have to go to the State Prison with
the chance that sooner or later they will be
pardoned. And with reason. Already the
leading opponent of the death penalty had
headed a movement for the pardon for mur-
derer, (Thorne) who had been the longest
confined in the prison. Every person who
suspects his life is in jeopardy from some
revengeful, brutal character, must prepare to
defend himself.
Mr.. Rust reviewed the arguments for and
against the death penalty. The law of capi-
tai punishment smites the murderer. with death
the moment he inflicts the mortal wound. 1t
makes of him so terrible an example as to
deter others. 1t is only through the imper-
feet agencies by which it is executed that it
fails of its intended effect. Were it executed
with the celebrity with which the crime was
committed, no sane person. however wicked,
would commit murder. History shows how
men of the most daredevil dispositions have
been subdued at the sight of the gallows.
Scenes in the early history of San Francisco
and of Gen. Buffers rule at New Orleans,
showed the effectiveness Of the death penalty
to awe the worst and most obstinate elements
of society into obedience.
Much has been said in this discussion
against the moral right of the government to
take life, but what was moral right as dis
tinguished from justice? Government holds
not only the property but the lives of its sub
jects at its call It masses them into battaions
and hurls them into the vortex of death. II
does this on the principle of its own preserva-
ton. Hasn't it the same right to do it to pre-.
serve the life of one subject against the mur
derous designs of another? The great Bill OF
Rights. the Declaration of Independence, de.
clares that for the purpose of protecting
those inalienable rights-life. liberty and the
pursuit OF happiness-governments are insti-
| tuted. Is it protecting life to grant immuni.
ty to destroyers of life: Throughout the
Scriptures Divine Justice threatens death
and eternal destruction to the impenitent.
The Sc Iatof from Cumberland, TMr
Young had endeavored to impeach the char.
acter Of Moses as a lawgiver by alleging that
he himself was murderer. But the law wal
Rnwsv H. t. II