|
Corpun file 19688
The New York Times, 10 January 1895
Mr. Gerry Has a Bill Which, He Is Sure, Will Become a Law.
To Whip Wife Beaters
Dr. A.F. Currier's Strong Argument
Lashes, He Said, Could Not Degrade the Monsters Who Struck
Women -- Other Physicians of the Same Mind.
A bill will shortly be introduced in the Legislature to
provide for corporal punishment for wife beaters and other brutes
convicted of felonies.
This information came out last night at a meeting of the
Section on Public Health at the Academy of Medicine, in West
Forty-third Street.
Dr. Andrew F. Currier read a paper on the subject of
"Corporal Punishment for Certain Forms of Crime," which
was discussed by Elbridge T. Berry, Dr. E.H. Grandin, and the
Rev. Dr. B.F. Da Costa. Dr. J. West Roosevelt presided.
Dr. Currier first reviewed briefly the history of corporal
punishment. Reforms were brought about a hundred years ago, he
said, by the guillotine, but to-day we used the ballot. He read a
number of extracts from The New-York Times of recent dates to
show that wife beating was prevalent. He referred especially to
the case of Mrs. Mary Latzen, who was struck in the face by her
husband in the presence of Justice Voorhis, and to that of Sailor
Petersen, who murdered his wife and children.
The doctor also told of many cases in his own professional
experience of women who had been beaten by their husbands or
other male members of their family.
The punishment to-day for such crimes, he contended, was
wholly inadequate. The only effective punishment was that which
gave physical pain. Imprisonment had no terrors for such inhuman
brutes. He denied that flogging under such circumstances was
either degrading or barbarous. Corporal punishment could not
degrade wife-beaters.
They could not be made worse by a flogging, but they might be
made better, and they would serve as an example to other vicious
characters.
Dr. Currier believed that the flogging should be administered
in private with only the inflictor of the blows and a competent
physician present. He said the whipping pose had served its
purpose well in Delaware.
"A man who strikes a woman should be thrashed," said
the doctor in conclusion.
In introducing Mr. Gerry, Dr. Roosevelt gave his own views on
the subject, practically agreeing with what Dr. Currier had said.
Mr. Gerry said that at the recent convention of the Society
for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, in this city, he had
been authorized to draw up a bill, to be introduced during the
present session of the Legislature, providing for the corporal
punishment of wife-beaters and monsters of an even worse type.
"This bill provides," he said, "that for all
felonies in which physical injury is inflicted the court may
have, in its discretion, the power to add corporal punishment,
not to exceed forty strokes of the lash, inflicted on the bare
back by a warden or a keeper, in the presence of a competent
physician and with none others present."
Mr. Gerry read the statistics of brutal crimes collected by
his society since 1890 where children were involved to show how
inadequate was the punishment provided by law. Such brutes, he
said, feared only physical pain, and that was the only proper way
they could be dealt with.
The Rev. Dr. Da Costa spoke very briefly, but was of the
opinion that the whipping post was a necessity for wife-beaters
and a certain other class of criminals.
Mr. Gerry said after the meeting that he felt quite confident
that his corporal punishment bill would be passed at the present
session of the Legislature and be signed by the Governor.
Follow-up: 21 February 1895 - The Whipping-post Bill. To be Reported, with Wife Beaters Exempted from its Provisions.
|