The Monroe journal., 1922-02-03

the intensity of his wickedness be-
comes greater. In the name of de-
ceacy and common sense, II prison
discipline and a penitentiafy be need
ed for thieves and piekpoekets, why
are they not all the more needed for
murderers and burglars? Yet We
reform the one and hang the other.
How utterly absurd j, 5 that the law
which detects and Furnishes homicide
would. in order 10 prevent murder,
nubl;cly commit murder itself. We
talk fervently upon the saeredness Of
human life and the awful guilt Of
taking il away-and then We dellber-
ately take il away ourselves. Those
who favor the death penalty contend
that "pun shment by death is neees-
sary, because it < requisite to re-
move from society member who
has already injured it, and might
inmre il again" If this is all, per-
petual Imprisonment would suffice.
What is the use of intlicting death
If prison bars are sufficient TO hold
the horse thief why are they not suf-
6cient for the murderer? Must society
avenge itself? When did society ac-
ouire the legal and moral right TO
wreak vengeance upon an lndividualg
+ Is il right for society TO Kill a man
/ because he has killed? Is this not
doing evil for evil? Vengeance is
mine. | will repay saith the Lord" "
I Vengeance is an individual act, pam
ishment belongs to God. Society is
between the two: punishment Is
above it's power. retail alton IS beneath
i il. 1t is the business Of Christian
state to correct and mend individuals,
not TO avenge itself by thetcommis
sion of murder more heartiesS and
foul than was ever committed by an
Individual. Death belongs to God
alorN. BY what right do men touch
that unknown thing
An Elevated Ain Says Hugo
Hugo said in his preface THE last
day Of a condemned, Il do not know
any aim mere elevated more holy.
than that of seeking the abolition OF
capital punishment If futurity should
award me the glory Of having sue
ceeGad-which | dare not hope--l de-
sine no other crown Cam, the first
10 Kill. committed foul and pre-
meditaed murder. According to the
Bible. Cain was tired by the Supreme
Judge of the universe. Did God con
denim him to death Not at all. He
sentenced Cain to banishment and
when the poor fellow complained "that
every one that iindeth me will slay
me-" he was not told that this would
be- In accordance with the laws of
society and that was what he de-
seryed-buI the Lord set a mark
upon Cain lest any finding him should
kin hm." If this account of the
first murder and his trial is to be
taken as a precedent, then why not
follow it. for what il is worth. OF
course Cain was punished as all Of
Tenders should be. not for the sake OF
punishment but for the purpose OF
"mending a broken reed Old Soc.
rates said once; 1T is better to suffer
wrong than to commit it, but wher
man commits a crime il is better
for him to be punished than to gC
unpunished." And so it is, but the
object of all punishments should b,
the reformation of the offender. Can
a Christian state deny this proposi
ton? Can the Christian church deny
that an punishment smaeks of ven
geance? If they can, then the intllc
ton Of all punishment smacks Of ven
geance. Only this and nothing more
Ii this proposition could be sustained
would be ashamed of both church
and state.