Life imprisonment is an unjust sentence. Life prisoners are those
who have received their sentence for murdering a fellow being. In
many cases, however, they can not really be classed as criminals.
They are victims of circumstances. The deed was not premeditated but
was brought about on the impulse of the moment. The sentence of a
lifelong imprisonment forever deprives of the liberties of freedom
and the association of friends and relatives, and the only hope of
freedom is an escape, then to remain a fugitive from justice. Mr.
Meade in his report suggests that the life prisoner should be allowed
the same privilege of commutation or short time as is given other
prisoners, and in this give him a hope of release. There are tables
which insurance companies use (and they are supported by the courts)
which fix an average limit of years of the existence of a man,
computing from the first year; the interval beyond the present age
naturally decreasing as old age approaches. He says: “It would seem
that these tables furnish a foundation on which a system for life
prisoners should be based. For instance, a man twenty years of age is
convicted of murder and sentenced to prison for life. Our tables show
that the average number of years for a man of that age still to live
is approximately thirty-four. Figuring the legal commutation on this
term of thirty-four years, we find the prisoner would be compelled
to serve about twenty-three years of solid time. A man thirty years
old would on the same basis, having about thirty years to live, serve
eighteen years; a man forty years old, having about twenty-five years
to live, would serve sixteen years in prison. Thus we might continue
our observations indefinitely.”
My views of this matter may be severely criticised, nevertheless
we do not consider that five years is unreasonably short for the
first offence of murder. This releases the innocent man who may
have been sentenced through circumstantial evidence or otherwise by
false accusation. It is a long sentence for a man who has acted on
the impulse of the moment or in a fit of anger; and even to the one
who has premeditated the crime, five years of hard labor and proper
training in a prison will be an impressive lesson to cause him not to
repeat the act. For a second offence it should not be more than ten
or fifteen years, and even for a third offence it would not be out of
reason to give him the life sentence with the regular commutation. This
reasoning may to many at first thought seem ridiculous, but upon proper
consideration we should remember that as long as there is life there
is hope, and while there is a possibility of reformation a man should
have some kind of a chance; not only a chance to reform, but a chance
to enjoy his liberty. Even after he has served two or three terms he
is not then a worse character and not more dangerous to a community
than thousands of others who are just as guilty but have not suffered
the penalty of the law. When a man has served according to the penalty
here suggested, has he not suffered sufficient to satisfy the law? and
should we not be willing to allow him the privileges of liberty and to
enjoy life once more? It is a hard heart indeed that will place a man
behind prison-bars for life. In England there is a possibility of being
set at liberty after twenty years, on account of good behavior. There
needs to be a radical change in our laws on this line.