On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
nature by _ being sang ^ qijecl byjegal W&'WlCT ^ daV ?¦ Ana tha ^ woat v / o ^ \^ be called murder by its rigjht , name if don § in private , ^ desefves not & i ^ udh | bjft ^ JT appellation , because Ji Jia % th # rf . ipi ^ t day sun upon it , and is a spectacle of
curiosity and horror to surrounqipg crowds } On this part of my subj $£ t I cannot refrain from extracting some excellent remarks from a little work , * equally distinguished for its ability and its striking and benevolent views . u right to put an offender to
death must be proved , if it can be proved , at all , Either from an express permission of the Christian Scriptwes * or , > supposing' Christianity fp k&y $ given no decision either qir ^ tjy V QF indirectly , fr 6 m a necessity yyl ^ ch
khcxivs no alternative , Npvy , SYSry one \ ldi 6 tf $ t % t this express penr $ s sion to Inflict death is not to be foim $ 3 and upon the question of its nec ; e $$ ity , we ask for that evidence which alone
can determine it , the evidence of experierjce ; and we shall probably not be contradicted when we say ; that that degree of evidence which experience lias afforded , is in our favour rather than against us . But some persons
seem to maintain an opinion that in the case of murder , at least , there is a sort of immutable necessity for taking the offender ' s life : c IVhoso sheddeth man ' s bloQd , by man shall his blood be shed . If any one urges this
rule against us ' , we reply , that it is not a rule of Christianity ; and if the necessity of demanding blood for blood is an everlasting principle of retributive justice , how happens it that in the first case in which murder
was committed , the murderer was not put to tleath ? The philosopher , however , would prove what the Christian cannot , and Mably accordingly says , * In the state of nature I have a right to take the life of him who lifts his
arm againsk mine . This right upon entering into society I surrender to the magistrate . * If we conceded the truth of the first position , ( which we do not , } the conclusion frgm it is an idle sophism ; for it is obviously preposterous to say / that because I have i , . ¦ ¦ »•
* Ay JiMyxvy into tbc Accordancy of Wm ; , ) vith , 1 ^ £ rui < 4 ple $ of Clmsjiauity , ana ari ExamihaUQn of the Philosophical Kdksouiij #% wMcii ft iV defended , &c-
Untitled Article
a ;! &d } f £ o : take | he Ijfe o £ . # j&frkjt * h ^ iMp ^ if I M Jtpt HUV Mo » iiitii ^ state , which fa in no such d « ng-er ^ h& $ a right to jeJq the same . The d ^ Dger which constitutes the alleged right in the individual , does not exist in , tlie case of the state . The foiindatipn of
the right is gone , and where can * be the right itself ? Having , hawjever , been thus told that the state has a right to kill , we are next informed , by Filangieri , that the crirninal ^ has no right to live ; he s ^ ys , *> If I feave
a right to kill another man , he has lost his right to lifeJ Rou $ seaif g <* es a little farther ; he , telk i * s tfest m cop ^ ec ^ uience ^ pf tlfe € social < x > ntrQ $ which wje . pi f ^ e ^ yi ^ h ^ tte sqy ^ e } ga oa eDLtemiw , mio spmiyi , t life ^ mm
cpfli ^ 9 wt ^ g * mk PR l % stated so t ^ ^ p h ^| d yf | iiEiJives , it ^^ m ^ ^^ l y as Jea ^ p fcs , ^ yvp } ^ &n (\ Jimst gwp thzm up . ivb ^^ ever Jtheir o ^ n <^ , the state , require tUibn . * * He ^ ays > , c T £ h $ preservation of bot | i sides ( the eriminal and the state ) is incompatible ;
onp of the two ramt perish / How it happens that a nation ' mint perish * if a convict is not hanged , the reader , I suppose , will not know , I have referred to these speculations for the purpose of shewing that the right of putting offenders to death is not
easily made out : philosophers would scarcely have had recourse to these metaphysical abstractions if they knew sin easier method of establishing the right ; even philosophy , hoiyever , concedes as much . € Absolute necessity alone / says Pastoret , * can justify the
punishment of death ; ' and Rousseau himself acknowledges that ' We have no right to put to death , even for the sake of example , any but those who cannot be permitted to live without danger / " The above observations have great force , and the more it is
considered , the more evident it will appear that the danger is an imaginary one : the guilt attaching to such a punishment cannot be palliated , for it cannot be . proved to be necessary * . Ab long as tnere are prisons to c ^ nfind ,
ana other punishments to QQiTfecfe , tlii ? £ pal resource might certainly be avpideq . And what is the testimony of ( experience on this subjects JDoea it ijot tell us that whe ^ p or 4 jttett > ftr < e not punislied with death . , sojfer from being more frequent they are actually
Untitled Article
70 Thoughts on the Punishment of Death .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1826, page 70, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2545/page/6/
-