JB/096/207/001

Click Here To Edit

MURDER Child-Murder

We cannot have a more satisfactory proof that in the Crime of Murder, it is the Terror
spread by it in Society, the Community & not the loss of a Subject member that is & ought to be regarded, principally
is a position that discovers a proof than which nothing can be more satisfactory than by viewing each of those two circumstances separately of calamity apart, & observing the conduct of the
Law to each when standing singly. By analyzing resolving the compound [form] into it's two constituent
forces, we shall & beholding each exert itself apart, separately we shall see discern without
illusion to which of them the conjunct affect is principally owing.

In Accidental Slaying, + +Or take Chance- as a more unexceptionable instance — but then here is a nominal Punishment viz: Forfeiture tho' not usually exacted: so that the contrast is not so strong. then Case the Case of a subject to the State is the same
as it is Murder. Yet for this there is no Punishment at all. Why? because it
carries no Terror with it. For no inference arises from the past slaying, of any
future slaying by the same person; nor by any other person from the impunity
of the first.

In the crime of sending Anonymous Threatening Letters, then the mischief is
Terror & nothing else. Yet this is punished capitally, with as good reason, as it
seems, as Robbery & even Burglary, and with better of than Larceny & many other Crimes
& never met with a complaint of it's being too severe.

The Political Sanction here operates is not not added to the in accession to the moral; but in comes instead of it substitution — If the woman is discovered & not put to death by sentence of the Law, she will live in shame- if she is discovered & put to death — she will not live in shame — If she is not discovered she will neither be put to death, nor live in shame. Thus we see the Crime of Child-Murder, as it is called, is a crime totally distinct
from Murder, in it's consequences as in the motive which gives it birth. is it's origin It's
past perpetration gives no apprehension affords no inference of any future to persons who entertain apprehension,
or for whom apprehension is entertained. Why? because it does not originate
from either of these motives which subsisting if carried into effect in the way of
Murder, give causes of apprehension. It originates not from either Avarice or Hatred
it originates from the irresistible impulse of Self-preservation, obey'd at the expense
of one being which does not feel the cost.

As in spite of all Punishments it is a crime that must be frequently committed
(as frequently nearly I should suppose as if it had none) & the Punishment therefore must
be perpetually incurred, it is one of those cases when the mischief of the Penalty is stands single
uncompensated. greater than the mischief of the Crime; & is therefore a proper subject only of Indirect
Legislation. [only.]

HOMICIDE capacity intent — of Infants [BR][7]

Identifier: | JB/096/207/001 "JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 96.
Date_1		Marginal Summary Numbering
Box	096	Main Headings	legislation
Folio number	207	Info in main headings field	homicide of infants
Image	001	Titles
Category	text sheet	Number of Pages	1
Recto/Verso	recto	Page Numbering	c7
Penner	jeremy bentham	Watermarks	[[watermarks::j honig & zoonen [lion with vryheyt motif]]]
Marginals		Paper Producer	cc1
Corrections		Paper Produced in Year
Notes public		ID Number	31211
Box Contents