The Death Penalty

In the 1860s, there was a great deal of debate in the newspapers as to whether or not the death penalty, even in murder cases was justified.

It was being argued that, in many cases, a plea of insanity should be accepted, and this could then reduce the crime from murder to manslaughter.

The Bristol Times and Mirror, took up the argument, in its edition of Tuesday the 3rd of September, 1867:-

MURDER AND MURDERERS

It is comforting to believe that fewer murders are committed than there used be in proportion to the population.

Recently published returns assure us of that; and as the means employed for the detection of crime are now so effective, there is no reason to disbelieve the statement.

At the same time, although education and religious training are more general, the murderers of our day appear not less savage and cruel in their nature than those in times past.

Since Burke carried on his trade in death, or Palmer schemed his poisonings, no worse or more revolting atrocities have been heard of than those forced upon public attention within the last few days.

It would seem if the thirst for blood survived all civilising influences, and that, in spite of gentler habits and their refining tendencies, there remains a latent desire for torture, the development of which is not so rare as might be imagined.

CRIMINALS CONVICTED OF MURDER

Only last week two criminals convicted of murder, perpetrated, according to their own confession, under circumstances of peculiar atrocity, were hanged.

Hubbard Lingley shot his uncle for some imaginary grievance, and for this he was executed at Norwich.

George Britten, a Somersetshire farmer, well to do in the world, murdered his wife by beating in her skull, and then, like Daniel Good, who hid away the mangled remains of his victim in the stables on Putney-heath, he tried to conceal his crime by dragging the body to an outhouse and setting fire to the place.

For this he paid the extreme penalty of the law at Taunton.

PETITIONS TO SPARE THEIR LIVES

But while both offenders were under sentence of death, and while the Home Office was besieged with petitions on their behalf, begging that their lives might be spared, as if in mockery of the law somebody in the neighbourhood of Alton, pleasant little market town in Hampshire, took a child, seven years old, ripped up her body, cut off her head, and tore out her eyes and threw them into a river, either to escape the consequences of the crime, or merely to gratify a fiendish instinct.

No wonder that a deaf ear was turned to Lingley and Britten’s sympathisers.

THE POWER OF THE CROWN

In all criminal cases the Crown has the power to respite – a process which, without actually quashing the verdict of the jury, relieves the sufferer from its worst consequences.

This power is exercised, and does not cause serious objection, when the Secretary of State, in concurrence with the judge who presided, thinks that new facts altering the complexion of the case have since appeared, or that the jury were mistaken on the original evidence.

It is a merciful provision, although there is a possibility of the prerogative being abused.

PETITIONING THE HOME SECRETARY

There is a system largely on the increase of memorialising the Home Secretary for a reprieve; and the minds of many are so constituted that they would rather see every constitutional safeguard shaken than a single man whom they believe to be innocent, although a jury have believed otherwise, suffer punishment.

ANOTHER CLASS

There is another class, perhaps not so numerous, who, in the fanaticism, of humanity, are ready to petition for the life of the worst criminals, with whose deeds no extenuating circumstances are associated to excuse mitigation of punishment.

And two or three notable instances of such petitioning have just occurred.

At Birmingham, a defaulting clerk, named Scott, shot down his employer, “with the cool ferocity of a backwoods rowdy”, and was found guilty and sentenced to death.

There appeared no possible excuse for any effort being made on his behalf, and yet certain persons did a memorial to the Home Secretary, who, after consulting the judge before whom the criminal was tried, and in consequence of the recommendation made by that judge, granted a reprieve, though on what grounds we have yet to learn.

Encouraged by this glaring proof of the facility of escape to murderers, some weak-minded persons desired a similar respite for Lingley and Britten, contrary to the opinion both of judge and jury.

Their prayer was not heard, but it may be questioned whether that will deter others from begging the life of the interesting criminal who may be proved the author of the Alton murder.

THE PLEA OF INSANITY

The plea of insanity, the chief one urged in extenuation of murder, will probably be put forward in his case.

The common-place criminal may be transported, and nobody cares: but it appears to be the theory of many that every wicked person, who commits great crime is mad, and, therefore, irresponsible, your most atrocious murderer is the victim only of lamentable delusion and a proper subject for pity and pardon.

Every criminal who has at any period of his career exhibited peculiar symptoms urges this modern invention to escape the gallows; and how easy it is to deceive judge and jury is shown by what took place in this city few days ago.

THE INSANE PICKPOCKET

A pickpocket was tried at the sessions for stealing a purse, acquitted on the ground of insanity, and was directed to be detained in a lunatic asylum.

Becoming tired of his experience there, he confessed he had only been feigning, and was again tried at the assizes, convicted, and sent to gaol for six months.

OTHER INSTANCES

There are many instances, no doubt, in which the reason has been destroyed, and in which the unhappy sufferer has consequently perpetrated acts from which in his sanity he would have recoiled in horror.

Townley might or might not have been a lunatic when, to prove his love for his sweetheart, he cut her throat; but he afterwards sprang from the top of the staircase and killed himself, which was anything but a sane proceeding.

He was not hanged, yet Southey, the assassin of his wife and family, was, although the keenness, cunning, and decision which both exhibited throughout their trial were remarkably akin.

Were it not for death punishment, society would never have heard of the excuse, or have found no greater importance attached to it than a jury usually gives to the plea raised for a thief, that he is the victim of kleptomania.

THE DEATH PENALTY

We are not now arguing the question of capital punishment.

So long as the law declares the life of the man guilty of wilful murder forfeited, the penalty should be maintained and inflicted with equal justice to all offenders, otherwise murders will cease to be rare in proportion to the infrequency with which the perpetrators are hanged.

Better to abolish the punishment than that the dangerous classes of society should hope to profit by the uncertainty of its application.

MURDER AND MANSLAUGHTER

It should not be enough to screen a criminal that he is only eccentric to degree that would count for nothing were interests of less magnitude at stake; nor ought the plea of provocation to be pushed to such absurd lengths as it is sometimes.

The law provides redress for insults to oneself, or to one’s wife, or daughter, or mother, or any other relation; and if the insult, real or supposed, is so slight that it is beneath the notice of the law, an outrage in redress ought not to be deemed sufficient to establish a case of insanity, or reduce a homicide from murder to manslaughter.