Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-10-09

reference to the criminality of the offense."
said Mr.. Pugh Criminal law regulates
the different degrees and kind Of punish
ment for misdemeanors to meet the aggra-
waiting mitigating character of the Of
Tense. 1t is the criminal intent evidenced
by the facts and circums tances in each par
ticular case that the law intends to reach
and punish. The reason urged for revivlng
punishment at the whipping post is to reach
the class of defendants who may commit
misdemeanors under circumstances unat-
tended by any aggravation SO far as the Of
Tense itself is concerned, and with the real
intention of securing what they regard as
benefit instead of a punishment 1t Is
conceded that the punishment of the whip
ping post is as severe as could be inflicted
for misdemeanors, as it brands the defend
ant with everlasting disgrace.
II am opposed to revving the whipping
post because 1t is punishment wholly dis
proportional to the character of the Of
lenses sought to be suppressed by its re-
vival.
Present Punishment Enough.
Defendants who are convicted for wife
beating deserve severe punishment and one
year in Jail and fine which rests entirely
in the discretion of the court cannot be
considered moderate punishment. The kind
and degree of punishment for criminal Of
lenses has always been a subject of wide
differences of opinion, and in its nature can
never be settled by legislation that will be
so satisfactory as to be accepted as a
finality. All writers on criminal laws agree
that the object of punishment is to deter
others from committing the offense and pre-
vent a repetition Of the crime by the CT
fender The class of offenders have men
toned as violaters of the law, to secure the
punishment for the purpose OF improving
their condition, must be already SO de-
graded as not to be changed by any re-
formatory punishment the law can infict
for miSdemeanors.
when the condition of every man is such
as to induce him to violate the law to OBJ
tain the means of support and shelter from
bodily suffering the motive for committing
the offense is in itself free from the GRIM
inality the law intends to punish.
ut is a debatable question whether steal
ing food to avoid starvation is moral
wrong, while technically 1t is Violate OF
the criminal law.
Eat best it is question of intent that de-
termines the degree of punishment In
every case, and whether the intent when
ascertained affects society in a greater or
less degree.
"Offenses that are classed as misdemean-
ors at common law in criminal statutes are
of such a character as to be considered
minor offenses, and not seriously detri-
mental to society. There are many in
famous felonies punished In a way much
less severe than the whipping post. 1t
must be conceded that the whipping post
is a punishment that leaves the offender
iii a condition of permanent disgrace, from
which he can never escape by any effort
to reform and elevate his condition.
No ofterse classed as a misdemeanor
ought to be visited with punishment
that Is contrary to the object of the law
in making every offense misdemeanor
1.-THE law of miSdemeanor was never in
tended to deter others from their COM
mission by making the punishment so
terrible and permanently infamous. !
consider the whipping post relic of bar
barism, unbecoming our advanced and en-
lightened civilization