PUNISHMENT
567
PUNISHMENT
It appears from the law of Numa, quoted by Festus
(b. v. Parrici QucesIotcs), that a parricida was any one
who killed another doh inalo. Cicero (pro Rose.
Am., e. xxv) appears to use the word in its limited
sense, as he speaks of the punishment of the culleus.
In this limited sense there seems no impropriety in
Catiline being called parricida, with reference to his
country; and the dictator Caesar's death might be
called a parricidium (the crime of parricide), con-
sidering the circumstances under which the name was
given (Suet., Caes., c. lx.xxviii). If the original
meaning of parricida be what Festus says, it may be
doubted whether the etymology of the word (paler
and caedo) is correct; for it appears that paricida or
parricida meant murderer generally, and afterwards
the murderer of certain persoiLs in a near relationship.
If the word was originally patricida, the law intended
to make all malicious killing as great an offence as
parricide, though it would appear that parricide,
properly so called, was, from the time of the Twelve
Tables at least, specially punished with the culleus,
and other murders were not.
Carnifex (flesh-maker) was the appellation given to the public executioner at Rome, who put slaves and foreigners to death (Plant., "Baoch.", iv, 4, .37; "Capt.", V, 4, 22), but not citizens, who were punished in a manner different from slaves. It was also his business to administer the torture. This office was considered so disgraceful that he was not allowed to reside within the city (Cic, "Pro. Rabir.", 5), but lived without the Porta Metia, or Esquilina (Plaut., "Pseud.", i, 3, 98), near the place destined for the punishment of slaves (Plant., "Cas.", ii, 6, 2; Tacit., "Ann.", XV, 60; Hor., "Epod.", v, 99) called Seskr- tium under the emperors (Plant., "Galb.", 20). It is thought by some writers, from a passage in Plautus (Rud., iii, 6, 19), that the carnifex was anciently keeper of the prison under the triumviri capilales; but there does not appear sufficient authority for tliis opinion (Lip.sius, "Exours. ad Tacit. Ann.", ii, 32).
Crucifixion was a method of inflicting capital pun- ishment by nailing or tying malefactors to pieces of wood transversely placed the one upon the other. The crosses used by the ancients were of several forms; one shaped like the letter X has often been called crux Andreana (Andrew's cross) because, ac- cording to tradition, St. Andrew suffered death upon a cross of that form; another was formed like the letter T, and a Roman writer, Lucian, uses that fact in disparagement of the letter itself. The third kind of cross, and that most commonly used, was made of two pieces of wood crossed so as to make four right angles. It was on this kind of a cross that Christ suffered, according to the unanimous testi- mony of the Fathers. Crucifixion, under the Roman law, was usually reserved for slaves and the worst kind of evildoers. The incidents of crucifixion were that the criminal, after the pronouncement of sen- tence, carried his cross to the place of execution, a custom mentioned by Plutarch and other writers as well as in the Gcspels. Scourging was inflicted upon the persons executed as in the case of other capital punishments among the Romans. Grotius and other writers have called attention to the fact that the scourging of Christ was not in accordance with the Roman usage, because it was inflicted before the sentence of death was pronounced. The criminal was next stripped of his clothes, and nailed or bound to the cross. The latter was the more painful method, as the sufferer was left to die of hunger. Instances are recorded of persons who survived nine days. The Romans usually left the body on the cross after death.
During the Middle Ages, in spite of the zealous humanitarian efforts of the Church, cruel punish- ments were commonly employed, and the death penalty was very frequently inflicted. This severity
was, in general, an inheritance from the Roman Em-
pire, the jurisprudence of which, civil and criminal,
pervaded Europe. One of the most horrible forms
of punishment, derived from ancient Roman usages,
was burning at the stake. The nations of modern
Europe, as they gradually developed, .seemed to have
agreed upon tlie necessity of extirpating all influences
and agencies which tended to pervert the faith of
the people, or which seemed to them to betray the
potency of evil spirits. Therefore, the laws of all
these nations provided for the destruction of con-
tumacious unbelievers, teachers of heresy, witches,
and sorcerers, by fire. The words of Exodus (xxii,
18), "Wizards thou shalt not suffer to live", sank
deep into the consciousness of the medieval people,
were literally interpreted, and rigidly observed.
Witches were burned in England as late as the time
of Sir Matthew Hale (1609-76). The Statute of
The Gibblt of Montfaucon
Engra\ ing in the National Library, Paria
Elizabeth in 1562 made witchcraft a crime of the first magnitude, whether directed to the injury of otliors or not. The Act of James the Sixth in 1603 defines the crime more minutely and provides the penalty of death. In Scotland, during the reign of the same monarch and even later, the i)rosecution and punishment of alleged witchcraft became a popular frenzy, to which tJhe courts lent their zealous aid. The number of victims in Scotland from first to last has been estimated as more than four thou- sand. The last regular execution for witchcraft is said to have taken place at Dornoch in 1722, when an old woman was condemned by David Ross, Sheriff of Caithness. The same belief in witchcraft and the same overmastering dread of it pervaded New Eng- land. Many persons were convicted of witchcraft and were tortured, imprisoned, and burned. One of the leaders in ferreting out and punishing witches was the Reverend Cotton Mather who, although a man of prodigious learning and deep piety, betrayed in the prosecution of witches absolute fanaticism and merciless cruelty. The laws against witchcraft were formally repealed in England in 1736. They were not repealed in Austria until 1766.
Canon law has always forbidden clerics to shed 'human blood and therefore capital punishment has always been the work of the officials of the State and not of the Church. Even in the case of heresy, of which so much is made by non-Catholic controver- sialists, the functions of ecclesiastics were restricted invariably to ascertaining the fact of heresy. The punishment, whether capital or other, was both pre- scribed and inflicted by civil government. The inflic- tion of capital punishment is not contrary to the
