CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.

Waikato Times, Volume 107, Issue 18027, 23 May 1930, Page 8

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.

QUESTION OF ABOLITION. SUBJECT KEENLY DEBATED. MEETING SUPPORTS MOTION. “That the abolition of capital punishment would be beneficial to society” was the subject of a debate conducted by the Workers’ Educational Association Debating Club last evening. Mr W. Jordan, junr., presided over a fairly good attendance of members. As leader of the affirmative, Miss A. Greville pointed out that the primitive idea of human sacrifice - still existed in spite of the march of so-called civilisation. False gods still survived, and one of these was the grim and unholy joy masquerading under the napies of “welfare of society” and “protection of the community.” Despite these false gods, we boasted of progress and the advance of civilisation. There would be no true progress until the false gods were destroyed. The welfare of the community was indissolubly linked with the welfare of the individual. Instead of watching idly murderers being killed off, society should devote more study and research to the psychology of the murderer. Society should get down to root causes and investigate the influences which facilitated crime. The speaker held that there were few cold-blooded murders, most of these crimes being committed under extreme provocation and under great mental stress. She strongly deprecated the attitude of people who “howled for blood” and cried “Kill off all murderers.” A murderer was a mentally sick man and should be treated as such. Alternative Proved Inadequate. For the negative, Mr C. C. Tidmarsh held that the cries of anti-death-penalty advocates represented the last remnants of the wave of humanitarianism, much of which was sickly and illogical, which afflicted society in late Victorian dimes. In the same way as the razor-slasher dreaded a flogging, the blackmailer dreaded hardlabour, and the drunken motorist dreaded publicity and imprisonment, so the murderer dreaded capital punishment, which thus acted as a steady deterrent. The speaker submitted that life imprisonment, the only alternative, had been proved inadequate. British justice was recognised as being the fairest in the world. Capital punishment caused jurors to feel the full weight of, their responsibility because it was irrevocable and therefore often saved innocent men from conviction. Cases of innocent men being unjustly - condemned were negligible. He concluded by stressing that legal tribunals were appointed to compel plaintiff to abandon private desire for revenge. The law, having taken this responsibility, had to discharge it by infliction of the death penalty where deserved. In seconding the motion, Mr Rawlings held that society should concentrate, not on retributive measures against criminals, but on research work which would make crimes impossible. Surgical operations could alter the whole of a man’s mentality, and it was better to experiment in this way on offenders than to hang them. He also advocated education on the right lines and better environment for children which would remove some of the causes of crimes. Research Devoted to Criminal. Seconding for the negative, Mr T. H. Chester emphasised the point that if it had been shown a man committed murder under extreme provocation the law would not necessarily prescribe death as a punishment. Previous speakers had said the time must come when more research should be devoted to the criminal mind. He contended that that day -had come, for psychiatrists and psychologists were devoting all their energies in solving these problems to-day. A man, who, out of sheer vengeance, knowing the consequences, yet deliberately took the life of another, should pay the full penalty for his crime. In some murder cases the phrase was often used rightly, “Hanging is too good for him.” Many interesting aspects of the subject were revealed in the subsequent debate in which mstny participated. After the leaders on each side had replied, the motion was declared carried, voting being taken separately on the method of presentation and personal convictions. After ordinary ' club business had been dealt with the subject for the next debate on Thursday week was chosen as follows: —“That Disarmament is the Best Practical Means Towards Securing World. Peace.”