the men, women and, children of any community become familiar with the work of death as sanctioned by the state in the execution of offenders, and their horror of bloodshed will gradually but certainly diminish, and they themselves will kill if they have what they deem sufficient provocation. The state has set the example. Duelling, bloody affrays and murders, are fostered and sustained by the gallows. This is wrong. The state, in its dignity, should teach a lesson to every man, woman and child, just the reverse. Both by its laws and its examples, it should carefully maintain and enforce the sacredness of human life; teaching that retaliation and vengeance belong alone to a savage state; that to kill men because they have killed is but perpetrating the same evil; that it is better to suffer wrong than do wrong, and that clemency, forbearance, gentleness, are more divine, ennobling and blessed than retaliation and vengeance.

In every instance where a state or nation has exhibited such an example it has operated upon the people like leaven on meal, assimilating their hearts gradually but surely to its own divine nature. The officers of prisons in Belgium testified, that from "their experience the abolishment of Capital Punishment tended greatly to soften the disposition of the mass of the people." The same report comes from Russia and Tuscany. Such a thing in Maine as a murder is very uncommon; and the consequence is, when one occurs the whole community is shocked in its every nerve; while in California, where executions are almost of daily occurrence, the fact that a man has been murdered is received as coolly as the news of his marriage.

What a true philosophy calls for as a preventive to murder and protection against it is, not the gibbet-not the blood of the offender, but CORRECT MORAL SENTI

MENT AMONG THE MASSES, AND ESPECIALLY A DEEP REVERENCE FOR THE SACREDNESS OF HUMAN LIFE.

Let the State see to it that it sets the proper example, and let all parents instil into the minds of their children, from their very infancy, this reverence for human life, and they are effectually armed against deeds of blood to the last moments of their existence, as the consideration of a single fact will be likely to convince them. The Quakers, or Friends, are very particular in the education of their children on this point. Their religion utterly forbids the practice of war, duelling, hanging, or the destruction of human life for any consideration. In their very infancy their children are impressed with this important truth; while always, in more advanced age, they are strictly forbidden to attend an execution, or mingle in the company of those who are familiar with crime. Now is it not probable that if all children were educated in the same principles we should have no need of gibbets or State prisons. How seldom is a Quaker arraigned for crime; and what is remarkable, there is no account on record of a murder committed by one of this sect. Here is the influence of early training and a correct moral sentiment. On the other hand, the fact is notorious that those who have been guilty of the most villainous crimes were familiar with criminals and scenes of blood when young. An English writer records it as a fact, that some of the most desperate assassins ever incarcerated in the prison of the Old Bailey, in London, or hung beneath its walls, were the children of parents who resided in the alleys and courts in that vicinity and who were constantly about the prison and witnesses of every execution that occurred. Thousands transported to Botany Bay, took their first lessons in crime at that place, and beneath the very shadow of the gallows.

Thus have we demonstrated that the philosophy of Christianity is the best possible, as the basis of all human governments. Let us have faith in it and practically adopt it. "Overcome evil with good." Would to God that men, especially Christian men, could give up the devil, as an incentive to purity, and confide more in the moral power of God-or goodness!

19

CHAPTER XV.

TENTH REASON FOR ABOLISHMENT.

THE ENDS OF PUNISHMENT NOT ANSWERED.

Three objects of Punishment-Reformation-Example-Reparation-What Punishment is-What Revenge is The Christian Law Strangling Men will not Reform them -It is not an Example of Good-It cannot restore the life of the murdered Victim.

The gallows does not subserve any of the great objects of punishment.

This is our concluding reason for its abolishment. It is the last, but by no means the least in importance.

There can be but three proper objects of punishment, which are these, viz: First, the reformation of the offender; Second, an example for the benefit of others; and Third, restitution or compensation.

The first is the most important and legitimate object of punishment, which always implies correction. "Punishment is the infliction of pain in consequence of a neglect or violation of duty, with a view to correct the evil.” Hence, endless pain, or pain that results simply in the death of the body, is not punishment, for the reason that there can be no opportunity for correction. The apostle declares that "No chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous; nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruits of righteousness unto them which

are exercised thereby."* But if we "chasten" a man by strangling, or burning, or shooting him, what opportunity

*Heb. xii. 11.

has he for amendment. Christianity recognizes all men as brethren of one great family, and it demands that in devising punishments its votaries should be careful to adopt those only which will reclaim the vicious. The command is: "If thy brother be overtaken in a fault restore such an one;" not that we strangle the life out of him. Thus is it enjoined upon us to exert ourselves to rectify and soften the disposition of our brother; to correct whatever there is wrong in him, and raise up in his soul a power that shall be sufficient to counteract the power of future temptation. And can this be done by killing him? How unchristian is this whole system! If our brother is overtaken in a fault we say, "hang him! string him up! He has broken the law of God and man and deserves to be killed!" If he asks time for repentance we say, "give him no time!" "He is a murderer, and should die!" So we kill him, whether he is prepared for the great change or not. Now this is not punishment. Rather is it revenge, which is "the infliction of pain in consequence of the commission of injury, with a view to gratify a malignant passion." Should Christians ever be controlled by malignant passion?

The second object of punishment mentioned above, is example for the good of others. We might pause here to argue the right of society to kill one man for the good of others, but though the principle involves an absurdity, and, therefore, is not, and cannot be legitimate, this is not the place for its discussion. Our object here is to show that the gallows does not subserve any of the great objects of punishment. As we have seen, killing a man does not reform him; and we come now to say, that though we may kill him as an example, for the good of others, to deter them from crime and thus purify society, the practical operation of the act is