« PreviousContinue »
-41. Griggs, Olivett.. 42. Chapman, Richard. 43. Slaughter, Gaston.. 44. Thomas, Clarence. 45. Singer, Harry.. 46. Arkuszewski, Chester. 47. Kuhlman, William.. 48. Williams, Frank.. 49. Poholsky, John.. 50. Fortune, Raymond. 51. Fuller, Willis. 52. White, Monroe. 53. Hicks, Heber. 54. Smith, John.. 55. Shaw, Robert. 56. Marshall, Hugh. 57. Neal, Vurtis. 58. Noelke, Henry. 59. Dalhover, R. James. 60. Easton, Orelle..
61. Swain, James_
32 June 14, 1935 21 Nov. 19, 1935 37 Apr. 17, 1936 * 31 Oct. 19, 1936 25 Dec. 26, 1936 24 Mar. 12, 1937 28 June 19, 1937 _do.... do.
27 Sept. 17, 1937 28 Jan. 14, 1938 * 32 May 3, 1938
39 May 6,1938
22 June 1, 1938
28 June 28, 1938 20 July 8, 1938 * .do.
32 Sept. 30, 1938 32 Nov. 17, 1938 25 June 3, 1939 18 June 23, 1939 31 Aug. 16, 1939 25 Nov. 14, 1941 33 Feb. 10, 1942
64 Nov. 26, 1945
1 New trial.
IOWA STATE PENITENTIARY, HANGINGS
1. Dooley, James.. 2. Cumberland, J. K.
3. Smith, Joseph C.
4. Jenkins, John
5. Pavey, Ira..
6. Weeks, Eugene..
7. Cross, Orrie..
8. Thorst, Earl.
9. Olan Der, William 2
10. Maupin, Roy11. Burris, Archie. 12. Simons, Harland.. 13. Altringer, J. A. R. 14. Griffin, Pat.. 15. Brewer, Elmer. 16. Tracy, Reginald S. 17. Mercer, John M.. 18. Wheaton, Allen B.. 19. Heinz, Marlo... 20. Jacobsen; Franz A.
2 New trial.
KENTUCKY STATE PENITENTIARY, ELECTROCUTIONS-Continued
58. Lawson, Milford. 59. Moore, Willie.
60. Howard, James
61. McQueen, Clarence.
62. Hoard, Carl..
63. Hutsell, Ivan.
65. Edmonds, Richard.
66. Cooksey, A. P.
79. Chaney, Will..
80. Tincher, George W.
81. Glenday, Francis. 82. Graves, Wiley.
83. Williams, Charlie.
84. Smith, James..
June 28, 1935 *
86. Lotheridge, Eulie.
87. Bowman, Neal.
88. Tate, Calvin
[In 1920, following the rape murder of a little girl by Will Lockett (No. 32), a law was passed requiring that executions for rape would be by hanging in the county jail yards, in the presence of at least 50 witnesses. This law was repealed in 1938. The following is an incomplete list.]
WASHINGTON.-When the first Congress of the U.S. was considering the Bill of Rights (the first 10 Amendments to the new Constitution), it was warned that the prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment" in the Eighth Amendment might some day rule out capital punishment. That was over 175 years ago, but that day may soon be here.
The California Supreme Court this month, for the first time in the history of the country, is going to review the constitutionality of legal execution on the grounds that it violates the Eighth Amendment. No matter what the verdict is, it will probably be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, and if it finds that the dealth penalty is excessively cruel then at one blow capital punishment would be struck down in all 50 states.
This emotional issue has always sharply divided Americans, but in recent years the trend has been against the death sentence. Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, West Virginia and Wisconsin have all abolished it. New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island and Vermont retain it only for a second-time murderer, or for the slaying of a police officer, or for murder by a lifer.
Even in the states which still permit the death penalty, there has been a growing revulsion against it. From a peak of 199 executions in 1935, there has been a steady drop to 37 in 1962, 21 in 1963, 15 in 1964, 7 in 1965, and one in 1966. It's hard to know what the number might have been in 1967 for the 60 prisoners in San Quentin's death row have all been given a stay of execution by the California Supreme Court pending its ruling on the state's capital punishment law.
This novel legal approach has been fostered by the persuasive pleading of Gerald Gottlieb, a California legal scholar, whose thesis is that the death penalty is unconstitutional because essentially it is torture, and serves only the purpose of revenge. His view is that the only legal justification for execution is deterrence, but, since it doesn't deter effectively, it simply becomes unnecessary cruelty. "If there is no necessity for it," he says, "it becomes unconstitutional and cannot be imposed legally. The death penalty is the most dramatic symbol of barbarism present in our national domestic life."
The U.S. Supreme Court has said the amendment "must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society... The basic concept underlying the Eighth Amendment is nothing less than the dignity of man. While the state has the power to punish, the amendment stands to assure that this limit be exercised within the limits of civilized standards."
Any comparison of 18th and 20th century standards shows "an explosive expansion of the concept of cruelty." Children were once subject to the same criminal treatment as adults, and were worked 12 hours a day. Corporal punishment of the insane and feeble-minded was common practice. Flogging was widespread. Slavery flourished. All that has now changed.
Today the death penalty is not only cruel to the victim but to the jurist who has to impose it. Shortly before Christmas an Ohio judge openly wept on the bench when a jury brought in a mandatory death sentence against a 16-year-old boy who had fatally stabbed his foster father. The boy cried uncontrollably when the jury foreman read the verdict calling for the electric chair.
"I'm scared," he said. "I never expected the death penalty. I hold nothing against my mother. Nothing against my father, either. I was scared during the whole trial. I'm really scared." The judge covered his face and said, "I have never had to pronounce such a sentence."
[From the Economist, Sept. 30, 1967]
With extraordinary frequency these days the soft shuffle of a man condemned to death is heard along the concrete corridors in San Quentin prison which lead to the double-locked visitors' room where lawyers may be consulted. It is a special sound, this tread of the all-but-dead, because in California these men wear felt slippers. But their footfalls are stirring up echoes in the courts which are likely to reach the Supreme Court itself. They have brought to a temporary halt executions threatening over a hundred men and may signal a turning point in American criminal justice. For the first time there is a long range, carefully financed and strongly supported drive to eradicate capital punishment as unconstitutional because it is a "cruel and unusual" penalty which falls with especial weight upon the poor.
The court maneuvers are the work of the Legal Defence Fund of the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured Peoples and of the American Civil Liberties Union. They have mustered an array of eager young lawyers, including