The herald., 1896-02-15

own state OF Illinois that this s not right;
that it is inhuman and contrary to Justice
1t is Loudly claimed that it is the duty of the
state to remove the convict to better eli
matte conditions in order to give tho man
chance for his life. A transportation to
the :nesas of New Mexico; an exchange of
prisoners. 80 that threatened ones may go
toa non-consumptive climate and have a
suitable amount of outdoor work. proper
foou and clothing and strict individual iso-
laton; parole to non-tuberculous climes,
with due sanitary teaching and the best
advice or pardon, under certain circum.
stances, are the means toward the end ad-
vocated.
This raises the question, has state
right to force a convict to death? | have
read the advance copy of an editorial re.
lating to the duty of the state to the crim-
inal classes, who, sick or we'll, have ever
been and long must be the perplexty of
huinanltarianS as we'll as those whose duty
1t is to enforce the law. While the position
taken and so vigorously enforced is ire
fragible, there are certain consequential
issues which must be taken into account.
Suppose the medical staff of penitentiary
discover incipent tuberculosis in a notor-
Gus burglar at the beginning of his SEN
tence with the etate, has it the right to
transport him, reeking with moral and
physical disease, 10 some innocent and
helpless community to which he would be
an unnltlgated curse. morally and patho-
logically? Suppose the state begins to
send its tubercular criminals to soma anti
fubercular climate, what shall be done
with the gOuty criminals, its criminals who
have Bright's disease, its diabetc crimn-
ais, ETC.? 1T one class of criminals should
be sent to climate appropriate to their
maIadies. other classes of criminals should
also be sent to climates favorable to their
maladies. Else the question will come up,
is it consistent? As matter of absolute
fact and equitable justice, l do not think
that tubercular criminals have any claim
for mercy that they did not have before
they became tubercular. Neither do think
that they have any more claim for mercy
or favor than any other criminal invalid.
do not think the state is called upon to
provide person threatened with tubercu-
losis such Il change in his life as has been
suggested. For instance: 1t is not in
cumbent on the state to send such persons
to New Mexico or any like resort. Ger.
tainly siIch duty of the state to the Grim.
inal could not be denied to the innocent
and unprotected children within its limits.
II it be the duty OF the state 80 te provide
for its criminals by so much the more
would it be obliged to care for those who
had not offended against the laws of
society. This proposition admitted, we
would find the state with thousands of
patients demanding TO be transported to
mora congenai cllmes, and better hygienc
surroundings. This is not alone my
opinion, but also of my colleagues, Drs.
Danforth and Prescott, probably many
more will coincide, who as yet have not
made an open declaration on this subject.
Having been asked by n HERALD repre.
sentative to give my opinion and having
but little time to prepare it, l cannot go
into detail, as much as 1 might wish of the
question, HAS state a right to force a
convict to DEATH" My reply is ''yes.''
do not consider it case of forcing man
to death. Any man who is considered q
degenerate has my sympathy. A man of
br.-ins who will allow himself to occupy
convict cell. if he be guilty, should the
supreme power see tit to remove him from
done.'
DIR. Outhet and his father will remain in
the city during the winter.