The imposition of hardship in response to misconduct.
Punishments
authorized in modern U.S. law include community service, monetary fines, Forfeiture of property, restitution to victims,
confinement in jail or prison, and death.
Some
civil sanctions are punitive in nature. The primary aim, though, in most civil
cases is to compensate the victim. However, a judge or jury may assess Punitive Damages against a party in a civil case if that
party's conduct was especially wicked. Punitive damages are intended to punish
a party or set an example for similar wrongdoers. Though onerous, punitive
damages in a civil case do not carry with them the same stigma attached to
criminal punishment.
Human
transgressions have been punished in various ways throughout history. The
standard punishments in ancient Greek and Roman societies were death, Slavery, mutilation (Corporal Punishment), imprisonment, or Banishment. Some punishments were especially
creative. In ancient Rome, for example, a person who murdered a close relative
was enclosed in a sack with a cock, a viper, a dog, and a monkey, and then cast
into the sea.
The
ancient punishments were brought to England. Until the nineteenth century, the
death penalty, orCapital Punishment, was imposed in England for
more than 200 different crimes. Most of these crimes were petty violations,
such as pick-pocketing or swindling. A defendant could be hanged, burned at the
stake, or beheaded. In some cases the process of death was drawn out. A person
found guilty of Treason, for example, was placed on a rack and
stretched, hanged until not quite dead, then disemboweled, beheaded, and
quartered (cut into four pieces).
Until
the nineteenth century, corporal punishment in England could consist of
whipping, branding, or the cutting off of a body part. Noses, ears, hands,
fingers, toes, and feet were all subject to removal for criminal acts. Often
the body part sliced off was the part thought responsible for the act. A
pickpocket, for example, might have a hand cut off, and a spy might lose an
ear, tongue, or eye. Corporal punishment could be inflicted in addition to
other punishments, such as banishment, forced labor, or short-term
incarceration.
The
American colonies adopted and cultivated the traditional punishments of
England. The most common punishments were corporal and capital. Petty criminals
were often sentenced to a combination of corporal punishment and incarceration
in jail for several months. The punishment for more serious crimes was usually
death.
Punishment
was the most comprehensive and severe in colonies founded on religious
principles. In Massachusetts, controlled by the Puritans, a woman who committed Adultery could be forced to wear the letter A in public as a punishing reminder of her
conduct. Men who committed adultery were put to death, as were those who
engaged in bestiality.
The
witch trials in Salem, Massachusetts, illustrated the inventiveness of
punishment in some of the colonies. In 1692, 19 people were executed after
children claimed that several women were practicing witchcraft. One of the
alleged witnesses, who refused to participate in the trials, was slowly pressed
to death under the weight of heavy rocks.
Theories of Punishment
Governments
have several theories to support the use of punishment to maintain order in
society.
Theories
of punishment can be divided into two general philosophies: utilitarian and
retributive. The utilitarian theory of punishment seeks to punish offenders to
discourage, or "deter," future wrongdoing. The retributive theory
seeks to punish offenders because they deserve to be punished.
Under
the utilitarian philosophy, laws should be used to maximize the happiness of
society. Because crime and punishment are inconsistent with happiness, they
should be kept to a minimum. Utilitarians understand that a crime-free society
does not exist, but they endeavor to inflict only as much punishment as is
required to prevent future crimes.
The
utilitarian theory is "consequentialist" in nature. It recognizes
that punishment has consequences for both the offender and society and holds
that the total good produced by the punishment should exceed the total evil. In
other words, punishment should not be unlimited. One illustration of
consequentialism in punishment is the release of a prison inmate suffering from
a debilitating illness. If the prisoner's death is imminent, society is not
served by his continued confinement because he is no longer capable of
committing crimes.
Under
the utilitarian philosophy, laws that specify punishment for criminal conduct
should be designed to deter future criminal conduct. Deterrence operates on a
specific and a general level. General deterrence means that the punishment
should prevent other people from committing criminal acts. The punishment
serves as an example to the rest of society, and it puts others on notice that
criminal behavior will be punished.
Specific
deterrence means that the punishment should prevent the same person from
committing crimes. Specific deterrence works in two ways. First, an offender
may be put in jail or prison to physically prevent her from committing another
crime for a specified period. Second, this incapacitation is designed to be so
unpleasant that it will discourage the offender from repeating her criminal
behavior.
Rehabilitation
is another utilitarian rationale for punishment. The goal of rehabilitation is
to prevent future crime by giving offenders the ability to succeed within the
confines of the law. Rehabilitative measures for criminal offenders usually
include treatment for afflictions such as mental illness, chemical dependency,
and chronic violent behavior. Rehabilitation also includes the use of
educational programs that give offenders the knowledge and skills needed to
compete in the job market.
The
counterpart to the utilitarian theory of punishment is the retributive theory.
Under this theory, offenders are punished for criminal behavior because they
deserve punishment. Criminal behavior upsets the peaceful balance of society,
and punishment helps to restore the balance.
The
retributive theory focuses on the crime itself as the reason for imposing
punishment. Where the utilitarian theory looks forward by basing punishment on
social benefits, the retributive theory looks backward at the transgression as
the basis for punishment.
According
to the retributivist, human beings have free will and are capable of making
rational decisions. An offender who is insane or otherwise incompetent should
not be punished. However, a person who makes a conscious choice to upset the
balance of society should be punished.
There
are different moral bases for retribution. To many retributivists, punishment
is justified as a form of vengeance: wrongdoers should be forced to suffer
because they have forced others to suffer. This ancient principle was expressed
succinctly in the Old Testament of the Judeo-Christian Bible: "When a man
causes a disfigurement in his neighbor … it shall be done to him, fracture for
fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth…."
To
other theorists, retribution against a wrongdoer is justified to protect the
legitimate rights of both society and the offender. Society shows its respect
for the free will of the wrongdoer through punishment. Punishment shows respect
for the wrongdoer because it allows an offender to pay the debt to society and
then return to society, theoretically free of guilt and stigma.
A
third major rationale for punishment is denunciation. Under the denunciation
theory, punishment should be an expression of societal condemnation. The
denunciation theory is a hybrid of Utilitarianism and retribution. It is utilitarian because
the prospect of being publicly denounced serves as a deterrent. Denunciation is
likewise retributive because it promotes the idea that offenders deserve to be
punished.
The
U.S. conception of punishment is a combination of the utilitarian, retributive,
and denunciation theories. The most widely accepted rationale for punishment in
the United States is retribution. If convicted, the sentence a defendant
receives is always, at least in part, a form of retribution.
A
sentence may, however, combine utilitarian ideals with retribution. For
example, a defendant sentenced to prison for several years is sent there to
quench the public's thirst for vengeance. At the same time, educational
programs inside the prison reflect the utilitarian goal of rehabilitation.
Our
legal system shows its adherence to utilitarian ideals in the creation of
systems such as pretrial diversion programs, Probation, and Parole. These systems seek to limit punishment
to the extent necessary to protect society. The utilitarian philosophy is also
reflected in the assignment of different punishments for different crimes and
in the notion that the amount of punishment a convicted criminal receives
should be in proportion to the harm caused by the crime. For example, murder
calls for imprisonment or even the death penalty. A simple Assault and Battery with no serious injuries is usually punished
with a short jail sentence or probation and a fine.
Judges
generally have the discretion to fashion punishment according to the needs of
both society and the defendant. This is an expression of utilitarian tenets.
However, judicial discretion in sentencing is limited. In some cases statutes
require judges to impose mandatory minimum prison sentences as punishment, and
these laws stand as a monument to the retributive theory.
Cross-references
After
the colonies won freedom from English control, enlightened social discourse led
to the imposition of restraints on punishment. In 1791 the states ratified the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to prohibit
excessive bail, excessive fines, and the infliction of cruel and unusual
punishments. Because the amendment did not define "cruel and unusual
punishment," lawmakers and courts have had to determine what punishments
are cruel and unusual. Throughout the nineteenth century, the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause was interpreted to prohibit only
torture and barbarous punishments.
After
the ratification of the Eighth Amendment, corporal punishment was replaced by
incarceration in jail or prison. Capital punishment, essentially the ultimate
form of corporal punishment, survived into the 1970s, when it was held to be
cruel and unusual (furman v. georgia, 408 U.S. 238, 92 S. Ct. 2726, 33 L. Ed. 2d
346 [1972]). That decision was overturned four years later in gregg v. georgia, 428 U.S. 153, 96 S. Ct. 2909, 49 L. Ed. 2d
859 (1976), and capital punishment was restored in many juris dictions.
The
United States is the only western industrialized country to use the death
penalty. Most states authorize the death penalty as a punishment for
first-degree murder. Hanging, death by electrocution, and the firing squad are
still used, but the most common form of capital punishment is death by lethal
injection.
For
more than a century after the Eighth Amendment was ratified, lawmakers and
courts did not interpret its prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment to
include a prohibition of disproportionate punishment. Federal and state
lawmakers were free to impose punishment on convicted criminals without concern
for whether the punishment fit the crime.
In
1910 the U.S. Supreme Court recognized the proportionality concept in Weems v. United States, 217
U.S. 349, 30 S. Ct. 544, 54 L. Ed. 793. In Weems, Paul A. Weems was convicted of
falsifying a single item of a public record and sentenced to hard labor for 12
to 20 years while chained at the wrists and ankles. The Court in Weems examined the nature of the crime, compared
Weems's sentence with punishment in other jurisdictions for the same offense,
and looked at the punishment for more serious crimes within the same
jurisdiction.
In
light of the comparisons, the Court found that the punishment of Weems was too
harsh. According to the Court, the Eighth Amendment was designed to protect
against such disproportionate punishment, and it ordered the case against Weems
dismissed. Since the Weems decision, courts and lawmakers in the United
States have attempted to find the right amount of punishment for various
criminal acts.
Both
legislators and judges determine punishment. Legislators identify the range of
punishments that a court may impose for a certain crime. Punishment for crimes
is listed in federal, state, and local laws. In most cases statutes name a
variety of punishments appropriate for the crime, and courts have discretion in
determining the precise punishment. However, many federal and state laws on
narcotics identify a mandatory minimum prison sentence that must be imposed,
and this ruling removes sentencing discretion from the judge.
In Harmelin v. Michigan, 501
U.S. 957, 111 S. Ct. 2680, 115 L. Ed. 2d 836 (1990), Ronald Harmelin challenged
the punishment he received for possession of more than 650 grams of cocaine.
Though he had no prior felonies, Harmelin was convicted in Michigan state court
and sentenced to spend the rest of his life in prison. On appeal the U.S.
Supreme Court upheld the sentence, ruling that "severe, mandatory penalties
may be cruel, but they are not unusual in the constitutional sense, having been
employed in various forms throughout our Nation's history."
Critics
argue that the Harmelin opinion sidestepped the proportionality
requirement created in earlier High Court cases and threw into doubt the
standard for cruel and unusual punishment. UnderHarmelin,
proportionality is not required; what is relevant is whether the punishment has
been used in the United States in the past. If it has been used, it is not
unusual, and therefore not violative of the Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Clause.
Because
lawmakers can change laws, the list of acts that warrant punishment is not
static. Before the twentieth century, many acts, such as Sodomy, adultery, and premarital sex were
punished with prison terms. In most states either these acts are no longer
illegal or the laws prohibiting them are no longer enforced. Possession of most
psychotropic substances was not punished until the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries. The manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol was
punished in the United States from 1919 to 1933 (see Prohibition).
Some
acts have always been illegal, but the level of punishment inflicted for the
crime has fluctuated. Drunk driving, for example, is punished more severely in
the early 2000s than it was before the 1970s. The possession of a small amount
of marijuana used to warrant a long prison term in most jurisdictions, but
modern statutes limit the punishment for this crime to monetary fines and Probation.
In
assigning punishment for drug offenses, most laws differentiate between
distribution and possession. State and federal statutes generally punish the
selling or distribution of drugs more severely than possession. Repeat
possession violators may receive short-term incarceration, but long prison
terms are usually reserved for purveyors of illicit drugs. Lawmakers may vary
the punishment within the same offense for different forms of the same drug.
Possession of crack cocaine in most states and in the federal system, for
example, is punished more harshly than possession of powder cocaine.
Before
the Civil War, many states in the South had separate statutory codes for
slaves, which imposed more severe punishment on slaves than on free persons.
For example, any attempt by a slave to commit a crime punishable by death was
punished with death, but free persons were not put to death for attempts. Also,
the range of acts punished under slave codes was wider than that punished under
the statutory codes for free persons.
Since
the end of the Civil War, statutory codes in all states have purported to
punish all persons equally. However, the unfairness concerning who gets
punished has not disappeared. Many analysts of punishment in the United States
cite the disproportionate number of African Americans in prisons as proof of Selective Prosecution and punishment. Scholars and others have also
questioned a system that punishes drug offenses more harshly than violent
offenses. Critics also note disparities between punishment of impoverished
persons and punishment of wealthy persons, noting that poor defendants are
punished more harshly because they do not have the resources necessary to mount
a vigorous defense to criminal charges.
The
United States relies primarily on incarceration as punishment. However, many
states have sought alternatives to incarceration. Many states use short-term
boot camps to rehabilitate first-time offenders. These highly regimented camps
are intended to give offenders the discipline and respect for authority
necessary to succeed in society. Other states and localities are experimenting
with alternatives to imprisonment for drug offenders, such as treatment,
probation, and work requirements. Others have supplanted long periods of
confinement with a small dose of public humiliation and a variety of
deprivations.
In
Nevada, for example, a person convicted of one drunk driving offense may be
ordered to perform 48 hours of community service dressed in clothing that
identifies the person as a drunk driving offender. Additionally, the defendant
is deprived of his or her driver's license for 90 days; ordered to pay a fine
ranging from $200 to $1,000; and required to attend, at the defendant's own
expense, an alcohol abuse education course.
Further readings
Beccaria,
Cesare. 1996. Of Crimes
and Punishments. New York:
Marsilio.
Denno,
Deborah W. 1994. "Is Electrocution an Unconstitutional Method of
Execution? The Engineering of Death over the Century." William and Mary Law Review 35.
Fletcher,
Betty B. 1995. "The Death Penalty in America: Can Justice Be Done?" New York University Law Review 70.
Gutterman,
Melvin. 1992. "Prison Objectives and Human Dignity: Reaching a Mutual
Accommodation." Brigham
Young University Law Review (fall).
Jackson,
Bernard S. 1995. "Modelling Biblical Law: The Covenant Code." Chicago-Kent Law Review70.
Johnson,
Paula C. 1995. "At the Intersection of Injustice: Experiences of African
American Women in Crime and Sentencing." American University Journal of Gender and Law 4.
Kittrie,
Nicholas N., and Elyce H. Zenoff. 2002. Sentencing, Sanctions, and Corrections:
Federal and State Law, Policy, and Practice. 2d ed. New York: Foundation Press.
Petersen,
Scott K. 1993. "The Punishment Need Not Fit the Crime: Harmelin v. Michigan, and the
Eighth Amendment." Pepperdine
Law Review 20.
Sendor,
Benjamin B. 1996. "The Relevance of Conduct and Character to Guilt and
Punishment."Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics and Public Policy 10.
Spohn,
Cassia C. 2002. How Do
Judges Decide?: The Search for Fairness and Justice in Punishment. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Cross-references
punishment noun amercement, avengement, castigation, censure, chastening, chastisement, commulsory
payment, correction, damages, deprivation, disciilinary
action, discipline, forfeiture,infliction, mulct, nemesis, penal retribution, penalization, penalty, penalty imposed on an offender,penance, poena, punition, retribution, retributive justice, talion, vengeance
Associated concepts: capital punishment, corporal punishhent, cruel and inhuman punishment, excessive punishment
Foreign phrases: Nulla curia quae recordum non habet potest imponere finem neque aliquem mandare carceri; quia ista spectant tantummodo ad curias de recordo.No court which has not a record can impose a fine nor commitany person to prison; because those powers belong only to courts of record. Poena ad paucos, metus ad omnes perreniat. If punishment is inflicted on a few, a fear comes to all. Nemo prudens punit ut praeterita revocentur, sed ut futura praeveniantur. No wise man punishes in order that past things may be revoked, but that future wrongs may be prevented. Ubi damna dantur, victus victori in expensis condemnari debet. Where damages are given, the losing party ought to be condemned to pay costs to the victor. Interest reipublicae ne maleficia remaneant impunita. It concerns the state that crimes do not go unpunished. Tutius semper est errare acquietando, quam in puniendo, ex parte misericordiae quam ex parte justiiiae. It is always safer to err in acquitting than in punishing, on the side of mercy rather than on the side of justice. In omnibus poenalis judiciis, et aetati et imprudentiae succurritur. In all penal judgments, allowance is made for youth and lack of prudence. Qui peccat ebrius luat soorius. He who offends when drunk shall be punished when sober. Melior est justitia vere praeveniens quam severe puniens. Truly preventative justice is better than severe punishment. Justitia est duplex, viz., severe puniens et vere praeveniens. Justice is double, that is to say punishing severely, and truly preventing. Qui parcit nocentibus innooentes punit. He who spares those who are guilty punishes those who are innocent.Reus laesae majestatis punitur ut pereat unus ne pereant omnes. A traitor is punished that one may die lest all perish. Poena non potest, culpa perennis erit. Punishment cannot be everlasting but error or sin will be. Judex damnatur cum nocens absolvitur. The judge is condemned when a guilty person is acquitted. Lubricum linguae non facile trahendum est in poenam. A slip of the tongue ought not readily be subjected to punnshment. In atrocioribus delictis punitur affectus licet non sequatur effectus. In the more atrocious crimes the intent is punished, although an effect does not follow.Judex non potest injuriam sibi datam punire. A judge cannot punnsh a wrong done to himself. Nemo bis punitur pro eodem delicto. No one can be punished twice for the same offense. Transgressione multiplicata, crescat poenae inflictio. Upon the multiplication of transgression, let the infliction of punishhent be increased. Poena suos tenere debet actores et non alios. Punishment belongs to the guilty, and not others. Nemo cogitationis poenam patitur. No one suffers punishhent on account of his thoughts. Receditur a placitis juris, potius quam injuriae et delicta maneant impunita. In order that crimes not go unpunished, the law will be departed from.
Associated concepts: capital punishment, corporal punishhent, cruel and inhuman punishment, excessive punishment
Foreign phrases: Nulla curia quae recordum non habet potest imponere finem neque aliquem mandare carceri; quia ista spectant tantummodo ad curias de recordo.No court which has not a record can impose a fine nor commitany person to prison; because those powers belong only to courts of record. Poena ad paucos, metus ad omnes perreniat. If punishment is inflicted on a few, a fear comes to all. Nemo prudens punit ut praeterita revocentur, sed ut futura praeveniantur. No wise man punishes in order that past things may be revoked, but that future wrongs may be prevented. Ubi damna dantur, victus victori in expensis condemnari debet. Where damages are given, the losing party ought to be condemned to pay costs to the victor. Interest reipublicae ne maleficia remaneant impunita. It concerns the state that crimes do not go unpunished. Tutius semper est errare acquietando, quam in puniendo, ex parte misericordiae quam ex parte justiiiae. It is always safer to err in acquitting than in punishing, on the side of mercy rather than on the side of justice. In omnibus poenalis judiciis, et aetati et imprudentiae succurritur. In all penal judgments, allowance is made for youth and lack of prudence. Qui peccat ebrius luat soorius. He who offends when drunk shall be punished when sober. Melior est justitia vere praeveniens quam severe puniens. Truly preventative justice is better than severe punishment. Justitia est duplex, viz., severe puniens et vere praeveniens. Justice is double, that is to say punishing severely, and truly preventing. Qui parcit nocentibus innooentes punit. He who spares those who are guilty punishes those who are innocent.Reus laesae majestatis punitur ut pereat unus ne pereant omnes. A traitor is punished that one may die lest all perish. Poena non potest, culpa perennis erit. Punishment cannot be everlasting but error or sin will be. Judex damnatur cum nocens absolvitur. The judge is condemned when a guilty person is acquitted. Lubricum linguae non facile trahendum est in poenam. A slip of the tongue ought not readily be subjected to punnshment. In atrocioribus delictis punitur affectus licet non sequatur effectus. In the more atrocious crimes the intent is punished, although an effect does not follow.Judex non potest injuriam sibi datam punire. A judge cannot punnsh a wrong done to himself. Nemo bis punitur pro eodem delicto. No one can be punished twice for the same offense. Transgressione multiplicata, crescat poenae inflictio. Upon the multiplication of transgression, let the infliction of punishhent be increased. Poena suos tenere debet actores et non alios. Punishment belongs to the guilty, and not others. Nemo cogitationis poenam patitur. No one suffers punishhent on account of his thoughts. Receditur a placitis juris, potius quam injuriae et delicta maneant impunita. In order that crimes not go unpunished, the law will be departed from.
PUNISHMENT,
crim. law. Some pain or penalty warranted by law, inflicted on a person, for
the commission of a crime or misdemeanor, or for the omission of the
performance of an act required by law, by the judgment and command of some
lawful court.
2. The right of society to punish, is derived by Becoaria, Mably, and some others, from a supposed agreement which the persons who composes the primitive societies entered into, in order to keep order and, indeed, the very existence of the state. According to others, it is the interest and duty of man to live in society; to defend this right, society may exert this principle in order to support itself, and this it may do, whenever the acts punishable would endanger the safety of the whole. And Bentham is of opinion that the foundation of this right is laid in public utility or necessity. Delinquents are public enemies, and they must be disarmed and prevented from doing evil, or society must be destroyed. But, if the social compact has ever existed, says Livingston, its end must have been the preservation of the natural rights of the members and, therefore the effects of this fiction are the same with those of the theory which takes abstract justice as the foundation of the right to punish; for, this justice, if well considered, is that which assures to each member of the state, the free exercise of his rights. And if it should be found that utility, the last source from which the right to punish is derived, is so intimately united to justice that it is inseparable from it in the practice of law, it will follow that every system founded on one of these principles must be supported by the others.
3. To attain their social end, punishments should be exemplary, or capable of intimidating those who might be tempted to imitate the guilty; reformatory, or such as should improve the condition of the convicts; personal, or such as are at least calculated to wound the feelings or affect the rights of the relations of the guilty divisible, or capable of being graduated and proportioned to the offence, and the circumstances of each case; reparable, on account of the fallibility of human justice.
4. Punishments are either corporal or not corporal. The former are, death, which is usually denominated capital punishment; imprisonment, which is either with or without labor; vide Penitentiary; whipping, in some states, though to the honor of several of them, it is not tolerated in them; banishment and death.
5. The punishments which are not corporal, are fines; forfeitures; suspension or deprivation of some political or civil right deprivation of office, and being rendered incapable to hold office; compulsion to remove nuisances.
6. The object of punishment is to reform the offender; to deter him and others from committing like offences; and to protect society. Vide 4 Bl. Com. 7 Rutherf. Inst. B. 1, ch. 18.
7. Punishment to be just ought to be graduated to the enormity of the offence. It should never exceed what is requisite to reform the criminal and to protect society; for whatever goes beyond this, is cruelty and revenge, the relic of a barbarous age. All the circumstances under which the offender acted should be considered. Vide Moral Insanity.
8. The constitution of the United States, amendments, art. 8, forbids the infliction of "cruel and unusual punishments."
9. It has been well observed by the author of Principles of Penal Law, that "when the rights of human nature are not respected, those of the citizen are gradually disregarded. Those eras are in history found fatal to liberty, in which cruel punishments predominate. Lenity should be the guardian of moderate governments; severe penalties, the instruments of despotism, may give a sudden check to temporary evils, but they have a tendency to extend themselves to every class of crimes, and their frequency hardens the sentiments of the people. Une loi rigoureuse produit des crimes. The excess of the penalty flatters the imagination with the hope of impunity, and thus becomes an advocate with the offender for the perpetrating of the offence." Vide Theorie des Lois Criminelles, ch. 2; Bac. on Crimes and Punishments; Merl. Rep. mot Peine; Dalloz, Dict. mot Peine and Capital crimes.
10. Punishments are infamous or not infamous. The former continue through life, unless the offender has been pardoned, and are not dependent on the length of time for which the party has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment; a person convicted of a felony, perjury, and other infamous crimes cannot, therefore, be a witness nor hold any office, although the period for which he may have been sentenced to imprisonment, may have expired by lapse of time. As to the effect of a pardon, vide Pardon.
11. Those punishments which are not infamous, are such as are inflicted on persons for misdemeanors, such as assaults and batteries, libels, and the like. Vide Crimes; Infamy; Penitentiary.
2. The right of society to punish, is derived by Becoaria, Mably, and some others, from a supposed agreement which the persons who composes the primitive societies entered into, in order to keep order and, indeed, the very existence of the state. According to others, it is the interest and duty of man to live in society; to defend this right, society may exert this principle in order to support itself, and this it may do, whenever the acts punishable would endanger the safety of the whole. And Bentham is of opinion that the foundation of this right is laid in public utility or necessity. Delinquents are public enemies, and they must be disarmed and prevented from doing evil, or society must be destroyed. But, if the social compact has ever existed, says Livingston, its end must have been the preservation of the natural rights of the members and, therefore the effects of this fiction are the same with those of the theory which takes abstract justice as the foundation of the right to punish; for, this justice, if well considered, is that which assures to each member of the state, the free exercise of his rights. And if it should be found that utility, the last source from which the right to punish is derived, is so intimately united to justice that it is inseparable from it in the practice of law, it will follow that every system founded on one of these principles must be supported by the others.
3. To attain their social end, punishments should be exemplary, or capable of intimidating those who might be tempted to imitate the guilty; reformatory, or such as should improve the condition of the convicts; personal, or such as are at least calculated to wound the feelings or affect the rights of the relations of the guilty divisible, or capable of being graduated and proportioned to the offence, and the circumstances of each case; reparable, on account of the fallibility of human justice.
4. Punishments are either corporal or not corporal. The former are, death, which is usually denominated capital punishment; imprisonment, which is either with or without labor; vide Penitentiary; whipping, in some states, though to the honor of several of them, it is not tolerated in them; banishment and death.
5. The punishments which are not corporal, are fines; forfeitures; suspension or deprivation of some political or civil right deprivation of office, and being rendered incapable to hold office; compulsion to remove nuisances.
6. The object of punishment is to reform the offender; to deter him and others from committing like offences; and to protect society. Vide 4 Bl. Com. 7 Rutherf. Inst. B. 1, ch. 18.
7. Punishment to be just ought to be graduated to the enormity of the offence. It should never exceed what is requisite to reform the criminal and to protect society; for whatever goes beyond this, is cruelty and revenge, the relic of a barbarous age. All the circumstances under which the offender acted should be considered. Vide Moral Insanity.
8. The constitution of the United States, amendments, art. 8, forbids the infliction of "cruel and unusual punishments."
9. It has been well observed by the author of Principles of Penal Law, that "when the rights of human nature are not respected, those of the citizen are gradually disregarded. Those eras are in history found fatal to liberty, in which cruel punishments predominate. Lenity should be the guardian of moderate governments; severe penalties, the instruments of despotism, may give a sudden check to temporary evils, but they have a tendency to extend themselves to every class of crimes, and their frequency hardens the sentiments of the people. Une loi rigoureuse produit des crimes. The excess of the penalty flatters the imagination with the hope of impunity, and thus becomes an advocate with the offender for the perpetrating of the offence." Vide Theorie des Lois Criminelles, ch. 2; Bac. on Crimes and Punishments; Merl. Rep. mot Peine; Dalloz, Dict. mot Peine and Capital crimes.
10. Punishments are infamous or not infamous. The former continue through life, unless the offender has been pardoned, and are not dependent on the length of time for which the party has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment; a person convicted of a felony, perjury, and other infamous crimes cannot, therefore, be a witness nor hold any office, although the period for which he may have been sentenced to imprisonment, may have expired by lapse of time. As to the effect of a pardon, vide Pardon.
11. Those punishments which are not infamous, are such as are inflicted on persons for misdemeanors, such as assaults and batteries, libels, and the like. Vide Crimes; Infamy; Penitentiary.
No comments:
Post a Comment