San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1891-01-08
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.
Condemned from the Pulpit by Rev.
Canon Mills, OF Canada.

Condemned from the Pulpit by Rev.
Canon Mills, OF Canada.
Montreal Gazette.
In view of the many executions
which have taken place In the DOM
inion of late, the sermon delivered by
Rev. Canon Mills In Trinity Church
Sunday was of more than usual inter-
est. Capital punishment has its adj
vocates and opponents; the rector of
Trinity places himself among the
latter in no uncertain terms. The
text of bis sermon last evening was
but from the beginning 1t was not
So" Matthew xix, 8, and upon 1t the
Canon preached scathing con-
domination of capital punishment. He
has, he said, in view Of the many I'M
happy crimes committed of late, been
requested to express an opinion upon
the subject, and to state whether the
punishment was In accord with
Christianity, o request he was happy
to comply with. The unhappy events
of the past year had been taken adj
vantage of by certain portion of the
press to pander to the morbid crav-
ing of ensationalism, which was, I'M
fortunately, common to some classes
of the community. The Woodstock
murderer had been held up to the
public as q saint, as a martyr and as
q fiend, according to the opinions of
those who made the statements,
| while the fact was that it was his
| family connection and position alone
which had awakened sympathy. He
| 1.-THE preacher) had signed the petition
| for clemency in the Birchall case,
| not because he thought him innocent
but because he firmly believed cap
| ital punishment to be wrong. If it
was right, there was no doubt that
Birchall had received the due re-
ward of his misdeeds, for no other
verdict would have been in accord
ance with the evidence. 1t was
Christ's prerogative alone to take
away the life he had given, for
vengeance and retributlon belon ged
to God. The law of capital punish
ment was not only opposed to the
law of God, but usurped Gods
prerogative. The sensatiOnaltsm Of
/ certain writers of the day was de-
nounced in unmeasured terms, and
the preacher then proceeded to point
to the case of Cain, the first murderer
In support of his argument that cap
ital punishment was wrong. Cain
was murderer of the deepest die,
but God did not condemn him to the
gallows. He saved him from his
| fellow men. The taking of q mans
life for another's was, in his opinion,
opposed to Gods law. Christianity
| should never cease its efforts to re-
| claim even the worst of criminals.
The Church of Christ should never
abandon man or hurl him out of
| life as unfit to live; to send him to
| hell, a place not fit for man but for
| the devil. In England in olden days
men had been condemned to death,
mutila ton and degradation for
petty crimes, but this had not had
the decisive effect of lettering
criminals, for men stole even under
the shadow of the gallows. These
punishments mad passed away; so
would capital punishment for MUIR
| der, for Christianity was opposed to
it. Some of its defenders held that
it was for the good of society that
capital punishment should be enforc-
ed; the preacher denied this, for it
was not accord with Gods teachings.
There was now q proposal before
| VIC puDiiC budb % puuliC hdbS niop
should be appointed. Even if cap
ital punishment were justified, such
an appointment was not. 1t would
be a national degradation. In olden
days the hangman used to do this
work in tremblings and disguise:
now we saw the pitiful spectacle of a
man going up and down this ooun-
try asking for the Office of public
L. IL fhak Id
would save the Dominion from such
degradation. The law had DO right
to help. to degrade any human being
by appointing him to hang his
fellowmen. The law should make
its officials carry out it's behest or
resign; they had no right to engage a
hIreling. The sermon was listened
to through with much interest.