Author Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated.1857 Excerpt: ... CHAPTER V. OF THE RIGHT TO PUNISH CAPITALLY. Although the texts and examples of Scripture do not carry with them, if rightly understood, the obligation to use capital punishment at all times, they are sufficient proof of the right to resort to it under some circumstances, and in some states of society; and this right has been asserted on other grounds by so many men of great wisdom and humanity, that it would be presumption in me to dispute it. But the merely human arguments on which the right is rested, seem to me, I confess, inconclusive. The right of the State to punish capitally is usually defended as being an extension only of the right of selfdefence, with a special application of the argument to the crime of murder. That one man may both lawfully and rightfully slay another who is violently seeking his own life is indeed plain, though even then he is bound to show, for his complete justification, that he had no other probable means of securing himself, either by avoiding the attack, if he knew of it beforehand, or by repelling it less forcibly if it came upon him unawares. But how is there the same right in the State to put A. to death for killing B., in the hope of thereby deterring C. from killing D., C. and D. being unknown and indefinite persons? It is very true that the State has an interest in the life of D. as one of its members; but in order fully to make out the plea of selfdefence for the State as for the individual, it must be shown that the existence of the State itself is threatened by the D prevalence which the crime is likely to gain if exempted from the punishment of death. Still, though the parallel cannot be exact between the two cases, I will admit that there is a strong analogy, and one perhaps sufficient to act upon, if it can be...