Evening star., 1932-04-29

Repeal Of the Baumes law in New
York. providing life penalty for fourth
offenders, is generally accepted as evi-
oence that severe penalties defeat their
own purpose and prevent conviction
by juries. 1t is also held that one pur-
pose Of law, that of correction, Is not
achieved under laws of such drastic
character. Prison riots are believed to
have been inspired by persons i'm
properly sentenced for life. Some other
States have enacted similar laws.
Pointing out that the New York
measure was enacted to check the ris-
ing tide of crime Immediately follow
ing the World War" the Appleton Post
Crescent feels that New York has
taken forward step in modifying the
drastic features of law which, in so
many cases, defeated its own purpose
and resulted in much injustice" Re
ferring to Investigations OF prison riots,
the Post-Crescent records that they
disclosed most of the trouble had been
provoked by inmates serving life terms
under the Baumes law" and adds: at
is easy to comprehend that men facing
life terms for crimes claSSed as felonies,
yet Of minor character, could become
exceedingly hostile and vindictive toward
society. In such cases the law was a
:.
Rather did 1t have the opposite effect. 3"
1T was thought five years ago, when
the Baumes laws were enacted" ac-
cording to the Birmingham Age-Herald,
that such severity would defeat it
self. 1t has done just that" The Age
Herald recalls: What happened when
that mandatory life sentence rule was
operative was that juries refused to find
Offenders guilty and judges accepted
pleas of guilty of misdemeanors, and
ell because the law was considered too
harsh. The lesson for the country at
large in New York's experience is that
you are not dealing sensibly with crime
merely by heaping up punishment. If
all that was needed for the solution of
this problem were vigorous penalties,
there would be no problem
according to the Cincinnati Times
Star, is not increased severity, but
increased certainty, OF punishment
that and a more judicious use of mod
ern reform measures. which too often
degenerate into coddling prisoners and
making Jail desirable" The Cincin-
natl paper, in review Of the record,
declares In numerous instances juries
have refused to convict and judges
have accepted pleas of guilty Of mis-
demeanors. believing the Baumes law
too drastic. At least one prison riot
was directly traceable to the despera-
tion Of men serving life sentences.
Perhaps these reasons would have been
insufficient to alter the law were they
not supplemented by more pressing
reason. With certain life sentence
facing him, felon caught in crime
has entirey too strong an incentive to
shoot his way to liberty. A similar
objection may be put to the proposal,
now widely advanced, that kidnapping
be made capital offense. Such a
law might well induce q kidnaper
threatened with detection to murder
his victim"
'Since the law went into effect" re-
calls the Youngstown Vindicator, "leav-
ing judges nothing to do but impose
life sentence upon fourth conviction,
there have been many instances where
juries either failed to convict or pleas
of misdemeanors instead Of felonies
were accepted. The State faced such
condition as it sought to correct by
making light sentences impossible.
Several States quickly followed the ex-
ampe Of New York by passing habitual
criminal laws. New Jersey was first to
act and Michigan was forced by public
sentiment to make a change after one
offender got life, his fourth conviction
being for possession Of pint Of liquor
Life for a pint became by-word
throughout the State. The prediction
was freely made when New York passed
the Baumes law that 1t would not serve
the desired end and the new sentence
of Is years is causing many to wonder
what the effect will be upon those who
already have been convicted three
their ways"
The New Orleans Item also Ia i'm
pressed by Ahe cases involving the dry