On Capital Punishment
Peter Petrovich, a professor
Maria Ivanovna, his wife Sewing.
Fedia, their son, a boy of nine Listening to his father’s conversation.
Ivan Vasilievich, counsel for the prosecution in the court martial
Ivan Vasilievich
The experience of history cannot be gainsaid. We have not only seen in France after the revolution, and at other historical moments, but in our own country as well, that doing away with—I mean the removal of perverted and dangerous members of society has in fact the desired result.
Peter Petrovich
No, we cannot know what the consequences of this are in reality. The proclamation of a state of siege is therefore not justified.
Ivan Vasilievich
But neither have we the right to presume that the consequences of a state of siege must be bad, or, if it proves to be so, that such consequences are brought about by the employment of a state of siege. This is one point. The other is that fear cannot fail to influence those who have lost every human sensibility and are like beasts. What except fear could have any effect on men like that one who calmly stabbed an old woman and three children in order to steal three hundred roubles?
Peter Petrovich
But I am not against capital punishment in principle; I am only opposed to the special courts martial which are so often formed. If these frequent executions did nothing but inspire fear, it would be different. But in addition they pervert the mind, and killing becomes a habit of thought.
Ivan Vasilievich
There again we don’t know anything about the remote consequences, but we do know, on the contrary, how beneficial. …
Peter Petrovich
Beneficial?
Ivan Vasilievich
Yes, how beneficial the immediate results are, and we have no right to deny it. How could society similarly fail to exact the penalty from such a wretch as …
Peter Petrovich
You mean society must take its revenge?
Ivan Vasilievich
No, the object is not revenge. On the contrary, it must substitute for personal revenge the penalty imposed for the good of the community.
Peter Petrovich
But in that case it must be subject to regulations settled by the law once forever, and not as a special order of things.
Ivan Vasilievich
The penalty imposed by the community is a substitute for casual, exaggerated revenge, in many cases ungrounded and erroneous, which a private individual might take.
Peter Petrovich
Passionately. Do you really mean to say the penalty imposed by society is never casual, is always well founded, is never erroneous? I cannot admit that. None of your arguments could ever convince me or anyone else that this is true of a state of siege, under which thousands have been executed … and under which executions are still going on—that all this is both just and legal, and beneficial into the bargain! Rises and walks up and down in great agitation.
Fedia
To his mother. Mother, what is father talking about?
Maria Ivanovna
Father thinks it wrong that so many people are put to death.
Fedia
Do you mean really put to death?
Maria Ivanovna
Yes. He thinks it ought not to be done so frequently.
Fedia
Coming up to his father. Father, isn’t it written in the Ten Commandments: “Thou shalt not kill”? Doesn’t that mean you are not to kill at all?
Peter Petrovich
Smiling. That does not refer to what we are talking about. It only means that men are not to kill other men.
Fedia
But when they execute they kill, don’t they?
Peter Petrovich
Certainly. But the thing is to know why and when it is permissible.
Fedia
When is it?
Peter Petrovich
Why, think of a war, or of a great villain who has committed many murders. How could one leave him unpunished?
Fedia
But isn’t it written in the Gospel that we must love and forgive everybody?
Peter Petrovich
If we could do that it would be splendid. But that cannot be.
Fedia
Why?
Peter Petrovich
To Ivan Vasilievich, who listens to Fedia with a smile. As I said, dear Ivan Vasilievich, I cannot and will not admit the benefit of a state of siege and courts-martial.