Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1904-05-26
VERMONT'S INCREASE OF MURDER

1t is reassuring to note the appreciation
in Vermont of the enormity of the increase
in murder and other crimes in this State
during the past few years, for it Is only
when public sentiment is aroused to the
point Of action that a remedy is made pos
sible 1t hardly needs argument to show
that the situation existing at the present
time in Vermont with reference to the
lax punishment of the crime of murder
is dangerous in the extreme and the Quos-
ton is how shall a remedy be provided
In order to reach an intelligent conclusion
in the matter it may be we'll to ask first
how this condition came about.
Vermont is one of the few States in
which the LEGISLATURE has come to be a
court of appeals for practically every per-
son convicted of the crime of murder The
power to commute sentence of death was
lodged with our legislative body for use
in exceptional cases but as a natural re-
suit of the success of appeals for elem
ency, every convicted murderer now looks
to the Legislature as "A body of refuge.
1t has been assumed that the course of
the Legislature during the past few years
In comnutinC death sentences has resulted
from the influence of popular sentiment
against capital punishment. but the his
tory of these cases shows that this is not
the case. In practically every appeal to
the Legislature the lawyers for the appel
liant have endeavorcd to show that there
was doubt about the guilt of the con
demned or there was provocation. or
there was evidence which did not appear
at the trial or some other reason for in
terfering with the course Of justice. In
these eases a number of legislators who
believe in capital punishment voted for
the committing of the sentence on other
grounds. Moreover if a majority of the
Legislature last year, for example, had
been opposed to capital punishment, the
chances are the death penalty would have
been abolished.
When one stops to consider the matter
1t is not surprising under the circum-
stances that Legislatures should be par
tal in such instances. AS a rule the Leg
| stature hears but one side of the case
| against the condemned. In court the
| State is represented by lawyers who are
charged with the duty of obtaining and
presenting evidence against the accused
Whe respondent has every opportunity Of
adducing testimony in support of the
claim OF innocence, and the judges are
charged with the duty of seeing that exact
| Justice is assured so far as is possible,
An impartial jury, after hearing all the
evidence on both sides of the case. de-
cides that the accused is guilty or inno-
cent as the case may be.
| When a murderer appeals to the Lesisla-
| ture as a court, however, all this is
changed. The members of the Legisla-
turc, know nothing whatever about the
| evidence in the case at the outset, and as
a rule direct testimony presented to them
is for the most part told by the lawyers
for the appellant who are thoroughly fam
liar with all the facts. The members OF
the Legislature on the other hand are sim,
ply jurors, except as they investigate tbs
case independently, and. even II so dis
posed they naturally have poor opportn,
nifty to get at the States side OF the case
as compared with the accused who is pro
vidcd with every resource that legal in,
genuity can devise.
Under these circumstances is 1t any
wonder that legislators who believe ii
capital punishment are persuaded there
may be a reasonable doubt of the gull
OF the condemned in the fullest sens,
Of the term and then act accordingly
Yet it has been argued that committing
the death sentence in cases like this show.
lpublic sentiment to be against capita