Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1895-07-06

were q 1urYman IN SuCl case, ne WOulu
not convict a Wronged husband who had
killed his wronger. for though it would
be better not TO kill even in such an in
stance, 1T is above all one OF those
cases in which a man must be law
unto himself
Mr. Clews goes further than Mr.. De-
pew. He would spare the guilty Wo-
man, but he would by no means spare
the guilty man. The eminent railroad
president would leave them both 10 the
stings OF conscience; but the million
aire banker" as the giver Of the feast
qualities him. holds that the guilty man
is a reptile, who should be crushed out
Of life as ruthlessly and remOrselessly
as the most yenemOus of serpents.'
II.
Perhaps these are the reporter S
words rather than the bankers; but
whosoever they are I find them pretty
wild and whirling; and do not find the
railroad presidents, all of them, much
better. I had always supposed that a
juryman was bound by his oath to rem
der a verdict according to the facts, but
it seems that DR.. Depew would net rent
Ter q verdict according to the facts in
The case OF a man who murders the
paramour of his wife. In a cass ike
that every man must be a law TO hin-7
self That is, he may transcend the
constitution and the statute, the effect
Of civilization, and the long result OF
time and legislate, adjudge, and exc
cute a penalty upon the man who has
injured him in that sort. In all other
sorts OF injury he must be subject TO
the law. but i'm this sort he may rise
sovereign above it. If he chooses he
may let his wronger go; if he chooses
he may kill him, and Mr.. Depew VIII
acquit him. though sworn TO ind him
guilty if shown guilty. Il must be-,
then that such a murderer has been
seized by a madness so sacred so dl-
vine, that it eXempts him from human
control. and that it is the sod strikes
through him when he Stays his wrong
en- Such a murderer by virtue Of his
wrong. is suddenly endowed with SUI
pernatural wisdom, and miraculously
fitted TO DO what is just in the circum-
stances without possibility Of error.
This is what Mr. Depew's words inn
ply. and that is why l venture to call
them not much better than wild and
whirling. If they were not his, l should
80 further and call them very deplor-
able. If they We're not his, l should say
that they would tend to peTpetuate and
encourage q kind Of murder which is
MS much murder as any other kind, and
which is exempt from punishment only
through @ survival OF feeling from the
baruarOus ages when a man could
av6nge any capital wrong done him. Il
those ages the avenger Of blood was EN-
powered 10 siay The slayer, or the slayer S
next of kin, but we have so far out
lived this that / do not suppose Mr..
Depew would think a man must be a
law unto himself to the murder OF tina
paramour's brother, or failing him, OF
his uncle CIR first cousin. Yet this wOulG
be the logic of his words in the bar
barous ages when alone they could have
logic. In our day, / do not understand
that q man may enact, and adjudge,
and 90 murder except in the case Of
his wifc's paramour. Even if ne should
see another killing his wife. except he
killed her murderer in her defense, he
must deliver him over 10 the law; but
her betrayal is a thing that at once
makes him legislator, judge, and eXecu-
toner.
In fact, according to Mr.. Clews, who
ought to have as great reason for re
speeding the law as Mr. DepeW, the
wife's paramount should be crushed
out of life without mercy. 1t is not
only the husbands right to murder
him, but it is his duty. This seems so
hard upon the husband, who in some
cases might wish to so TO the Christian
extreme of forgiving, or at any rate
use mis- common sense. and rejoice 10
be rid o.. bad bargain without blood
shed. that / cannot think the million
ore banker quito meant il.
I think that he meant to express him
self strongly, but not to say that man
ought under certain provOcation to do
murder.
The only excuse for the injured hus-
bands doing murder, or becoming "a
law unto himself as Mr.. Depew's
euphcmism puts il. is that he is mad
dcDed by his injuries. But even this
is not a sound excuse, for the seduction
of q wife is not the only injury which
m9ddens men. and if man maddened
by his injuries is to be excused in one
case, why not in another?
The appearance. in most instances
where the injured husband kills the
destroyer Oi his peace, is that he is not
at an maddenod ont of his self-posses-
sion. He goes about his crime with
very notable intelligence and dellbera-
ton. He steals upon his victim, or
lies in wait for him, with entire self
possession: and have no doubt that he
has forecast the chances Of his acQuittal
for his misdeed before he does 1t. I
have no doubt that far 0ftenest he
would never dream of killing the de-
sroyer Of his peace if he were not goad-
ed 20 it by q fear of the shame he mustl
suffer before the community, or thinks
ne must suffer. unless he murders one
of the paramours. or both of them. It
is therefore an abominable public Opin-
ION would have forced him to kill the
slayer OF his brother. or i'm yet other
times to fight a duel We have got rid
OF the avenger Of blood, and we have
got rid of the duelist; but the husband
maddened by his injuries still remains
to the enjoyment Of an impunity in
murder beyons the privilege Of any
other homicide.
The theory which his apoligists pro-
coed upon is that the betrayed wife