room, it ceased — at least in Kiev — when the first sentences of death were pronounced; and as for bravado on the scaffold, it was a mere matter of temperament, and was no more a characteristic of socialists than of common brigands. ...... In conclusion the procureur pointed out the danger that threatened social order and insisted that it was the duty of the court to treat such criminals with inflexible severity, bearing in mind the demoralizing influence of the verdict in the case of Véra Zasúlich.[1] Any mercy or forbearance shown to persons who had declared war against the state and against society would be criminal weakness. For such people there should be only one punishment — the scaffold.
After listening to the speech of counsel for the defense[2] the court allowed the accused an opportunity to speak his last words.[3] The prisoner admitted the distribution of the seditious books, but declared that he acted upon conviction, and with a desire to promote the welfare of the people by spreading among them the light of scientific knowledge and culture. He had never taken any part, he said, in bloodshed, nor in acts of violence. He regarded a social revolution as inevitable, but thought that it would come in the form of an economic crisis, and that it would be brought about peacefully. He interspersed his remarks with texts from the Holy Scriptures inculcating kindness, meekness, and love to one's neighbor.
After a short consultation the court found the prisoner guilty as charged in the indictment, and, in accordance with sections 249 and 977 of the penal code, sentenced him to death by hanging.
— Official Report of the Trial of Arsene Boguslávski, Newspaper Gólos, St. Petersburg, March 4, 1880.
1 Véra Zasúlich was tried before a jury in March, 1878, upon the charge of having attempted to kill General Trepóf, the St. Petersburg chief of police. The fact that she shot Trepóf was not denied; but the jury regarded her act as morally justifiable, and, since they could not save her from punishment in any other way, they simply set aside all the evidence and found her not guilty. No political offender has had a trial by jury since that time. [Author's note.]
2 When a political case is tried by a court-martial, the prisoner chooses, or the judges assign, one of the military procureurs to conduct the defense; but as this officer is wholly dependent upon the Crown, and is totally out of sympathy, moreover, with the accused, the defense that he makes is a mere empty form and rarely goes beyond a perfunctory plea for mercy. [Author's note.]
3 In trying criminal cases in Russian courts it is customary, after the evidence is all in and the speeches of counsel have been made, to allow the prisoner at the bar to say anything that he may then wish to say in his own defense. His remarks are known as his "last words." [Author's note.]
