Are We Resuming the Old Ways?

image 1image 2image 3image 4cropped image 1

ARE WE RESUMING THE OLD WAYS?

There is material for deep reflection in the following paragraph:

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT RESTORED IN WISCONSIN.—Both Houses of the Legislature of Wisconsin have passed a bill for the re-establishment of capital punishment for the crime of murder in the first degree. A strong reaction appears to have taken place in the minds of the people of the State in relation to this subject. This last action of the Legislature is understood to be in conformity with a general expression of the popular will.

Probably most of our readers will remember the ardor with which the question of Capital Punishment was discussed, some years since. Every city and large town had its association, respectable for numbers and ability, holding frequent meetings, to put before the people the arguments to abolish hanging. Speakers were invited—the Legislatures were memorialized—books and pamphlets were issued in great plenty.

It was about that time that the Democratic Review, a monthly Magazine of a profounder quality of talent than any since, was largely impressing the public, especially the young men. This review was among the most eager of the opponents of the gallows. Its corps of writers were all enthusiasts—believers in “a good time coming.” They made some of the most powerful attacks yet seen, against the orthodox theory of punishment.

We recollect the meetings for discussing this Capital Punishment question, which used to be held in New York in a moderate sized room in Broadway, near Lispenard street. A visitor there would have found a remarkable collection of “heads.” The Democratic Review writers were frequently quoted—some were present to speak for themselves, or as listeners. We allude to Bryant, Judge Edmonds, O’Sullivan, Whittier, Hawthorne, old Major D’Avezac, and others.

The result of this agitation and discussion told very largely—and is telling to this day, in the various benevolent reforms, and in an increased sensitiveness on the part of the public, toward any needless harshness in the treatment of criminals. At one time, the opponents of Hanging very nearly gained a success in the Legislature of this great State. They were invited also, by official invitation, to state their arguments before the Legislatures of some of the other States, east and west: we particularly remember New Hampshire.

It was considered a signal triumph indeed when Wisconsin abolished Capital Punishment, and substituted imprisonment for life. In quite a great many directions there was an earnest hope that it would turn out well, a willingness that it should have a fair trial, and a ready assent to the wisdom of following suit, in case it “proved.”

And now that Wisconsin has become disheartened with this reform, are we to suppose that the thing is settled? Tired with the impracticable theories of the reformers, are we all going to resume the old ways? It may be so, for a time.

We have often thought that the real good resulting out of the opposition-talent against the theory of hanging for murder, was, not that it might revolutionize the old law and custom, (which must still remain, for we are not half ready for a change yet,) but that it was in the good resulting out of the discussion, in such ways as diffusing more benevolence and sympathy through the public mind, elevating the range of temper and feeling, and reacting in a hundred different modes, indirectly, upon the popular taste, and upon criminal law, the doings of Courts and Juries, and the management of Prisons. These, with other considerations—among which we may mention the mere fact of a general interest being taken in the argument of such a question as Capital Punishment—will amply repay the enthusiasts of the Democratic Review,¹ and those who labored with them, for all they have done.

---