Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1907-09-20
DEATH PENALTY Is CONDEMNxD.


Friends took action on the question Of cap
ital punishment at the meeting held recent
ly ct Sandy Springs, this county. The meet
ing indorsed paper written by Mr.. Abram
Adelman, which In part :. rs follows:
fit can be supposed that capital crime
has ever been committed with full premeoi-
tation of consequences, the very fact OF ~
commiesion is proof that the Threatened
penalty IL not o deterrent. How foolish,
then, 70 suppose that this extreme penalty
can lesson or prevent such ofensee. Instead
Of lettering crime. 1t actually incites 70
| womanhood secure but strong popular
sense OF their sacredness. This ID the rea'
son there are 90 few crimes among the
| Quakers, the Moravians and other n0nre-
sistant scots. But does the State cultivate
among the people the idea Of the sacredneee
OF lie when Il kills the crlminale Would IL
foster respect for womanhood by reyerting
to the same barbarismf Manifestly not.
Wars, by fostering contempt for life, are In
variably followed In countries emerging
| from them by o long series OF murders.
When executions were public children who
had witnessed them were Often known 70
torture and kill their pet animals thereafter,
and even to torture one another. Such ex-
ecutlons were sometimes followed by car
| niyal of crime In which there was usually
at least one that resembled the ofense that
had lust been capitally punished. There
are many cases proving this fact 10 criminal
annals. Nothing ID stronger TO the criminal
mind than the power OF suggestion. The
brutalizlng effects Of public executions on
the community came ct length TO DO motto
ed. For this reason they have been abol.
ished In civilized countries, and now Tho
execution OF the criminal ID In nnost places
strictly private. By this concession the I'D.
vocates Of capital punishment have implied.
ly abandoned the ground that the spectacle
OF the criminals punishment 10 deterrent,
and have admitted II TO DO rather an incite.
ment to crime. But the modern news facil.
ities give to private executions oil the de.
moralizing effects Of public executions.
Many arguments against capital parish.
ment are absolutely unanswerable. One OF
the chief Of these Is the ialllbllity Of bu.
man Judgment. The innocence OF guiltless
men charged with crime 10 sometimes dis
covered and due PREPARATION may DO made
when he lives. But what PREPARATION can be
made II we have killed himf One case IL
on record OF the hanging OF an innocent
man who was actually embraced and con.
soled BY the real murderers just before
being launched into eternity-he all the
while vainly protesting his innocence. Is
Il not better that n nety- nine guilty men
escape than that one innocent man be put
| to death9
Again, capital punishment 10 to-day very
reluctantly imposed. II 10, Therefore, slow
and uncertain. But nothing 10 better set
tied than that It 10 the certainty ather than
| the severity OF punishment that deters men
from crime. If we believed that We should
positively die ct fixed, though distant day.
| ell Of as would worry about our approach
ing doom. Some Of ~ would die long be.
fore our time from this very worry. All Of
/ % might reason that In the course OF nature
We should hardly live until that day, bat, %
II IL, because the day Of death 10 uncertain,
we do not let the thought OF II worry rs
II 1t were law Of nature that upon com.
hitting murder or an infamous assault the
offender would drop dead Immediately
thereafter, as certain consequence, just %
one must surely die If he shoots himself 10
| Q vital spot or takes poison, then, Indeed,
| might death be to some extent deterrent
of crime. But under present conditions
| death by punishment 10 NO more imminent
TO him who commits murder or assault than
Ii his natural death. II he reflects ut all,
no expects to escape. Even II caught he
may be able to hire astute lawyers and go
free through their efforts.
| There is . still stronger force Of work 10
Il
| certain. At the present age men are by
nature refined and averse TO cruelty. So.
when Juror, who, before he was chosen,
stated that he believed In capital punish.
ment, gets into the jury after hearing the
case and begins 10 feel his awful responeT-
bility, he Ii loath TO impose tho death pen
atty. As fact, he does not impose II Ia
many cases where under the letter Of the
law he 10 bound to. Moreover, undue syeh,
pathy 10 often excited for the criminal, and
In many cases convictions are not secured ct
all. A punishment less than death, suoh %
imprisonment for life without power Of par.
don, can be much more easily enforced than
the death penalty, as the statistics OF the
States that have abolished capital punish
ment prove. The death penalty 10 for this
reason, II no other, bound TO 60 In time.
Il will become dead letter b cause OF the
reluctance of men to enforce II. And this
reluctance will strengthen as they come 10
have better conceptions OF the real causes Of
crime.
No advocate of capital punishment would
10. day defend 1t on the basis OF revenge.
The sole defense Of 1t at this time 10 that Il
10 a deterrent OF crime. Bot the deterrent
argument 10 being knocked away by hard
facts, and the advocates Of capital punish
ment find themselves driven back to the
primeval theory Of bloody revenge. With
most Of them this Ii really the Instructive
basis Of their belief In the gallows, although
| they usually deny II. But be their argu-
ments and motives what they may, It 70 Q
confession OF weakness TO say that public
security demands the dea'h OF any member
Of society.
The above arguments show thU inexpe-
diency Of the death penalty 90 means Of
protecting the State and Its peaceable clti-
l NJ Nk<~oa - halt hoo t. -
stract right, there may be adduced further
argument.
| Society has no moral right to take human
life. The Stste itself would deny the right
TO any organization within II, however large,
70 take the life Of its own members In &C.
| cordRnce with Its own rules. Then how
can 1t be supposed that adding enough other
persons 70 make Q State gives 70 this greater
number that right 70 kill which Q lesser
number cannot claimf Mere numbers can
never make wrong thing right.
By the death penalty society violates one
OF the fundamental natural laws by which
il governs the conduct OF It's Individual
members, namely, the natural law limiting
the right Of homicide In self defense. may
take q mans life only when or another
person Ii attacked by him and In imminent
danger through that mans acts. Should
he be advancing upon me with deadly
weapon and murder In his eye" and have
no means Of escape, the laws justify my
killing him. But whatever the danger, II |
overcome my adversary and have him lying
PROSTATE at my feet or bound hand and
ioot-if then kill him, society does not
Justify or excuse me. am In such case
guilty Of murder. Is It not time, then, 70
realize that when society has the criminal
bound hand and foot, as 1t were, 1t violates
lie own law Of self defense II 1t kills him
Gould / say TO society, II were charged
with murder, at 10 true had my adversary
down and OUT bat l had 10 kill him be-
cause II had not others % maliciously dis
posed 70 me 90 he would have assailed and
killed me~ or course not. But this 10 ex.
actly the "baby act" which society pleads
| wnen It takes convicts lie.
Tha killing of hnman halnR In hot hlnnd