按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
a private crime （crimen）； or also as a public crime （crimen publicum）。
Private crimes are dealt with by a civil court； public crimes by a
criminal court。 Embezzlement or speculation of money or goods
entrusted in trade； fraud in purchase or sale； if done before the eyes
of the party who suffers； are private crimes。 On the other hand；
coining false money or forging bills of exchange； theft； robbery；
etc。； are public crimes； because the commonwealth； and not merely some
particular individual； is endangered thereby。 Such crimes may be
divided into those of a base character （indolis abjectae） and those of
a violent character （indolis violentiae）。
Judicial or juridical punishment （poena forensis） is to be
distinguished from natural punishment （poena naturalis）； in which
crime as vice punishes itself； and does not as such come within the
cognizance of the legislator。 juridical punishment can never be
administered merely as a means for promoting another good either
with regard to the criminal himself or to civil society； but must in
all cases be imposed only because the individual on whom it is
inflicted has committed a crime。 For one man ought never to be dealt
with merely as a means subservient to the purpose of another； nor be
mixed up with the subjects of real right。 Against such treatment his
inborn personality has a right to protect him； even although he may be
condemned to lose his civil personality。 He must first be found guilty
and punishable； before there can be any thought of drawing from his
punishment any benefit for himself or his fellow…citizens。 The penal
law is a categorical imperative； and woe to him who creeps through the
serpent…windings of utilitarianism to discover some advantage that may
discharge him from the justice of punishment； or even from the due
measure of it； according to the Pharisaic maxim： 〃It is better that
one man should die than that the whole people should perish。〃 For if
justice and righteousness perish； human life would no longer have
any value in the world。 What； then； is to be said of such a proposal
as to keep a criminal alive who has been condemned to death； on his
being given to understand that； if he agreed to certain dangerous
experiments being performed upon him； he would be allowed to survive
if he came happily through them？ It is argued that physicians might
thus obtain new information that would be of value to the
commonweal。 But a court of justice would repudiate with scorn any
proposal of this kind if made to it by the medical faculty； for
justice would cease to be justice； if it were bartered away for any
consideration whatever。
But what is the mode and measure of punishment which public
justice takes as its principle and standard？ It is just the
principle of equality； by which the pointer of the scale of justice is
made to incline no more to the one side than the other。 It may be
rendered by saying that the undeserved evil which any one commits on
another is to be regarded as perpetrated on himself。 Hence it may be
said： 〃If you slander another； you slander yourself； if you steal from
another； you steal from yourself； if you strike another； you strike
yourself； if you kill another； you kill yourself。〃 This is the right
of retaliation （jus talionis）； and； properly understood； it is the
only principle which in regulating a public court； as distinguished
from mere private judgement； can definitely assign both the quality
and the quantity of a just penalty。 All other standards are wavering
and uncertain； and on account of other considerations involved in
them； they contain no principle conformable to the sentence of pure
and strict justice。 It may appear； however； that difference of
social status would not admit the application of the principle of
retaliation； which is that of 〃like with like。〃 But although the
application may not in all cases be possible according to the
letter； yet as regards the effect it may always be attained in
practice； by due regard being given to the disposition and sentiment
of the parties in the higher social sphere。 Thus a pecuniary penalty
on account of a verbal injury may have no direct proportion to the
injustice of slander； for one who is wealthy may be able to indulge
himself in this offence for his own gratification。 Yet the attack
committed on the honour of the party aggrieved may have its equivalent
in the pain inflicted upon the pride of the aggressor； especially if
he is condemned by the judgement of the court； not only to retract and
apologize； but to submit to some meaner ordeal； as kissing the hand of
the injured person。 In like manner； if a man of the highest rank has
violently assaulted an innocent citizen of the lower orders； he may be
condemned not only to apologize but to undergo a solitary and
painful imprisonment； whereby； in addition to the discomfort
endured； the vanity of the offender would be painfully affected； and
the very shame of his position would constitute an adequate
retaliation after the principle of 〃like with like。〃 But how then
would we render the statement： 〃If you steal from another； you steal
from yourself？〃 In this way； that whoever steals anything makes the
property of all insecure； he therefore robs himself of all security in
property； according to the right of retaliation。 Such a one has
nothing； and can acquire nothing； but he has the will to live； and
this is only possible by others supporting him。 But as the state
should not do this gratuitously； he must for this purpose yield his
powers to the state to be used in penal labour； and thus he falls
for a time； or it may be for life； into a condition of slavery。 But
whoever has committed murder； must die。 There is； in this case； no
juridical substitute or surrogate； that can be given or taken for
the satisfaction of justice。 There is no likeness or proportion
between life； however painful； and death； and therefore there is no
equality between the crime of murder and the retaliation of it but
what is judicially accomplished by the execution of the criminal。
His death； however； must be kept free from all maltreatment that would
make the humanity suffering in his person loathsome or abominable。
Even if a civil society resolved to dissolve itself with the consent
of all its members… as might be supposed in the case of a people
inhabiting an island resolving to separate and scatter themselves
throughout the whole world… the last murderer lying in the prison
ought to be executed before the resolution was carried out。 This ought
to be done in order that every one may realize the desert of his
deeds； and that blood…guiltiness may not remain upon the people； for
otherwise they might all be regarded as participators in the murder as
a public violation of justice。
The equalization of punishment with crime is therefore only possible
by the cognition of the judge extending even to the penalty of
death； according to the right of retaliation。 This is manifest from
the fact that it is only thus that a sentence can be pronounced over
all criminals proportionate to their internal wickedness； as may be
seen by considering the case when the punishment of death has to be
inflicted； not on account of a murder； but on account of a political
crime that can only be punished capitally。 A hypothetical case；
founded on history； will illustrate this。 In the last Scottish
rebellion there were various participators in it… such as Balmerino
and others… who believed that in taking part in the rebellion they
were only discharging their duty to the house of Stuart； but there
were also others who were animated only by private motives and
interests。 Now； suppose that the judgement of the supreme court
regarding them had been this： that every one should have liberty to
choose between the punishment of death or penal servitude for life。 In
view of such an alternative； I say that the man of honour would choose
death； and the knave would choose servitud