The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-05-16

is forbidden by the constitution of the
United States. "The punishment i'm
posed" he says, "was one exceeding In
severity, considering the offences OF which
the defendant was convicted, anything
which I have been able to find IN the
records of our courts for the present cen.
tury."
"Had he been found guilty of burglary
or highway robbery, he would have re-
ceived less punishment than Tor the OF
fenses of which he was convicted. 1t was
six times as great as any court in Vermont
could have imposed for manslaughter, for
gerry or perjury. 1t was one which, IN lis
severity, considering the offenses OF which
he was convicted, may justly be termed
both unusual and cruel. Ffty-four years
confinement at hard labor. away from
ones home and relatives, and thereby pre-
vented from giving assistance to them or
receiving comfort from them, is punish
ment at the severity of which. considering
the offenses, it is hard to believe that any
man of right feeling and heart can refra'n
from shuddering."
The cruelty of the punishment in this
! case. by the imprisonment at hard labor,
is further increased by the offenses being
thus made infamous crimes. The United
States supreme court has ruled that a
crime punishable by Imprisonment for
term of years at hard labor, was an in
famous crime within the meaning of the
fifth amendment of the constitution of the
United States. The selling of the liquors
in New York during three years, upon 'O7
distinct orders from Vermont, that is, one
| in every three or four days, to be paid for
| on delivery in the latter state are declared
| by the punishment inflicted 3o7 Infamous
| crimes"
By cumulative offenses. for each of which
imprisonment may be lawfully imposed for
short time, this sentence TO tifty-four
years Imprisonment was reached, a pun
! ishment, which Judge Field rightly holds,
was greatly beyond anything required by
| any humane law for the otfenses. Justice
Field says the state may make the drink
ing of one drop of liquor an offense to be
punished by imprisonment "out it would
be an unheard-of cruelty to count the
drops in a single glass and thereby make
a thousand ofienses and thus extend the
drinking of single glass of liquor to an
Imprisonment of almost indefinite dura-
ton. Suppose the state for each oHense
provided punishment of twenty stripes,
| then if there had been 307 otfenses, as in
| this case, 6, 40 stripes would be inflicted
| for these accum ulated offenses."
| The outrage of this cumulative sentence
out of all proportion to the otfense COM
mitted is confessed by the state of YER
| mont, whose governors have more than
once since the enactment of this liquor
law pardoned persons sent to prison Tor q
long term of years. In one instance a
woman in poor circumstances was SEN
fenced to the house of correction tor
thirty-seven years. but when Governor
Barstow became governor he pardoned the
woman on the petition of . number of re-
sponsible citizens who feltas Justice Field
does that this cumulative sentence was
"cruel and unusual punishment" In
other words, nothing but the e1-
ercise of the pardoning power of
the executive preveated the con-
fnement of a woman in prison for
longer term than couIdlegally have been
imposed upon her had she been convicted
of burglary, highway robbery, manslaugh-
ter, forgery or perjury.
Public opinion is ashamed Of this excess
sive severity, and asks the governor to ex-
{ ho q r
readily consents. If it vas not generally
known that the executive will be sure to
interfere TO prevent the fulfillment of the
sentence, it would be impossible to con-
Wet in cases like that d O'Neil. No hing
but the certainty OF clsnency on the part
Of the governor in such cases makes con-
victions possible. A nan of sense needs
no argument to cowince him that a
statute which inhicts aIch cruel and I'M
usual punishment as to demand the in
reference Of the exGutive is a statute
that ought TO be ameIned.
OF course the shorci Ehted cranEs who
have lifted the stante 10 the level &C
cruel and unusual enlistment" are the
modern survival Of te same breed of men
VINO up to the Revciltion Of 1853, were
able even in Englan4to inlict legal tor
ture, require excessie ball. impose Excess
sive fines and provle cruel and unusual
punishments out ofall proportion to the
otfenses charged. II is ameiancholy fact
that the most infinous and inhuman
legal punishments ever inflicted by n
Christian civilizaticn have been placed in
the code and kept tere by s0-caued moral
or religious reiormfs. 1t would not be
possible to re-enacti for debt
in the United Statd; It would not he pos
siole ID again iegallze the slave
trade, foreign or domestic, or re-en&ct
human slavery. it would not be
possible to imprjsfl n man in New Eng
land today for hee;ioal religious 0p;n ons,
rs has been done githin the present cen
fury; but it Is possible for ciump Of
cranks. calling Asn're-tes "teur= s....cs
rcforieers" t1 et...t Is -taalto ID Ees 4.
's"i, a4.ler Nh5,4 snaD or woman. l.-
selling .i4uoc ms bs tmpri-oret t,e a
l.e r-u.e. .n.ess tla Cove oaT CD otas. oul
OF h's personal !Umanity. 10 r-ea: .--
! prayer ol humaae persons au4 ISSUE par
don. The very same cranks. who pro
eurod tho enactment ot this law. won't rs
I L1r-ss-ste zen Il tlev sew a Southern
NOT burn negro, AMI yet the South IS i4o'