Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 10.pdf/113

 92

ABOLISH THE

DEATH PENALTY.

By James W. Stillman. IT must have been apparent to the most casual observer of current events that during the past few years there has been an alarming increase in the number of murders committed in various parts of the United States. According to an article published in a recent issue of the Chieago Tribune containing tables covering the statistics of lynchings, murders, suicides, and loss of life by disaster, since the year 1891, there were 10,652 murders in the year 1896, and 9,520 in the year 1897. There were also 1 24 legal executions in the year 1896, and 128 in the year 1897. As the death penalty for this crime prevails, and is enforced in nearly all of the States in the Union, the question is presented for the consideration of the people of the country, whether or not this is the most effectual means which can be employed in order to prevent the commission of these terrible crimes, or to reduce the total number thereof. It ap pears that this method of dealing with this great evil has not been as successful in ac complishing the desired result as its advo cates have had reason to expect; and there fore, it now becomes necessary to consider again the grounds upon which this policy has been justified in the past, and to ascer tain whether or not, a more rational and efficient mode of preventing the commission of murders may be devised, and whether or not the lives of innocent and worthy citizens may be in other ways more certainly pro tected against the foul deeds of these bloody assassins. Although I do not profess to be an expert in the science of criminology, I nevertheless have some very decided con victions on this subject, which I desire to present to my fellow-citizens in the columns of this valuable journal, hoping thereby to

excite greater interest among them in regard to this important question. However much people may differ in re gard to the proper sphere of government, all are agreed that the protection of each individual in the enjoyment of his life, his liberty and his property is one of its most important functions. Whether or not the State ought to regulate trade between its citizens and commerce with foreign nations, and to take charge of all the various matters which the Socialists of the present day are endeavoring to relegate to its control, no one will deny that it is its self-evident and imperative duty to administer justice be tween man and man. This being true, the State has the right to resort to such means as are absolutely necessary to enable it properly to discharge this duty, but no more. The true objects of all penal legisla tion are the prevention of crimes and the reformation of criminals; and according to the principle just stated, the Government may use such methods of dealing with them as will make it impossible for them to com mit other crimes and will also reform them if possible. This being accomplished, its duty towards them and others ends; and it has no right to subject the offender to pain or to annoyance of any kind simply for the purpose of vengeance. In other words, all that the Government can justly do with him is simply to restrain, but not to chastise him; for any infliction of unnecessary suf fering upon him is an infringement upon his rights as a human being which is itself a grievous crime. If I am correct in the general principles just enunciated, it follows as a natural and necessary conclusion therefrom that capi tal punishment is entirely unjustifiable and