Virginia citizen. (Irvington, Va.) 1891-1921, 1906-09-28
THE DEATH PENALTY.
Eveiutfon OF . Punishment to whicI
Forty Stntes stiII Hold.

Eveiutton OF q Puntshsaent fo which
Forty Stntes still Hold.
The death penalty as a feature of
the penal code is undergoing process
OF evolution which. Judging from exist
ing tendencies and those which have
characterized the worlds Jurisprudence
during the past fifty years, must re-
suit In Its complete extinction. 1t now
exists in forty states OF the American
Union.
In the Investigation OF this subject
the writer caused inquiries to be ad-
dressed to the attorney generals of
these forty states, asking their opinion
az to whether capital punishment tend
ed to diminish capital crime.
Eighteen OF the forty declined to ex-
press an opinion. Only sixteen of the
attorney generals of states which in
fiict the death penalty declared Them
selves as clearly OF the opinion that
capital punishment does tend to d.
minish capital crime Two OF the forty
We're positive In their conviction that
the death penalty does not tend to d.
minish capital crimes and stated their
opinion that the death penalty should
be abolished. while four OF the forty
gave qualified answers.
In the five states or Kansas. Maine.
Michigan, Rhode Island and WIscor-
sin, where capital punishment does not
exist, the attorney generals have noted
no increase In capital crime since the
abolition OF the death penalty and gen.
orally express themselves as salts
fed with the conditions existing In
their respective states. In Michigan.
wisconsin and Rhode Island capital
punishment was abolished over ffty
years ago and has not since been re-
enacted Though nominally prescribed
Dy law In Kansas, the death penalty
can be executed In that state only upon
the goxernor.s warrant. and the Kan
sas goyernors bare pcrpistently de-
ciincd to issue a death warrant, the
condemned persons meanwhile remain
Ing in prison. I'm i've other states
where the death penalty exists the
trial juries have power to commute
1t to life imprisonment.
The right OF the state to take the life
OF citizen has always been and
doubtless must remain an academic
question, although. conceding the
soundness OF the doctrine Of Consent
OF the governed" as the ultimate basis
OF governmental authority, 1t must be
admitted that one cannot be morally
held to contract whereby he con-
sents that another may take his life.
In our civil Jurisprudence no man can
give another the right to do him bodily
injury. Such contracts are always void
as against public policy. But the case
against capital punishment is made
when IT Is shown that 1t IL unneces
sary. 1t is coming to be understood
that the majority of human beings do |
not refrain from the commission of
capital crimes merely through fear OF
being hanged. Every person who com, |
mits capital crime knows that IN |
states maintaining capital punishment |
the death penalty is afiixed to that |
crime. From personal study of more |
than 1000 cases l am convinced that
most crimes are committed by persons
whoseither % expect, to escape ali pun |
ishment, or (2) who. upon the spur OF |
the moment, are regardless of al! nun |
lshment, or g, who are governed by |
cosmic. social or Individual factor,
which render the prospect of punish
ment imperative as a deterrent
agency at the time OF the commission
or the crime.-Harper's Weekly.