A STUDY BY BARNES SUGGESTS THAT CAPITALISM'S ECONOMIC IMPERATIVE WAS VERY MUCH PRESENT WHEN THE FIRST ELECTROCUTION LAW WAS ENACTED IN NEW YORK 1890. ONE OF THE ARGUEMENTS USED BY ABOLITIONISTS PRIOR TO THE LAW'S PASSAGE WAS THAT DEATH BY HANGING CONSTITUTED CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT AND, THEREFORE, WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. IN CONTRAST TO REFORMS ADVOCATED BY ABOLITIONISTS, CONFLICT EMERGED BETWEEN THE WESTINGHOUSE AND EDISON COMPANIES THAT GAVE SUPPORT TO CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. EDISON CONCEIVED OF A STRATEGY THAT HE FELT WOULD DESTROY THE WESTINGHOUSE COMPANY. HE DECIDED TO LAUNCH A MASSIVE PUBLIC RELATIONS CAMPAIGN IN SUPPORT OF USING ALTERNATING CURRENT AS A METHOD OF EXECUTION IN THE HOPE THAT THE PUBLIC WOULD OPT FOR HIS APPARTUS WHEN INDIVIDUALS WERE SEEN BEING EXECUTED BY WESTINGHOUSE'S MORE DANGEROUS CURRENT. THE PUBLIC RELATIONS CAMPAIGN INCLUDED TESTIMONY BEFORE THE STATE LEGISLATURE THAT SUBSEQUENTLY PASSED THE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT LAW. THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE TWO COMPANIES THEN SWITCHED FROM PUBLIC EXHIBITIONS AND LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEES TO COURTS. MORALS AND ETHICS EMBODIED IN THE FIRST INSTANCE OF USING CAPITAL PUNISHMENT UNDER THE 1890 LAW LEND CREDIBILITY TO THE CONTENTION OF BARNES THAT THE INTRODUCTION OF THE LAW WAS INFLUENCED AND PARTLY FINANCED BY CAPITALISTIC INTERESTS FOCUSED ON DISCREDITING THE USE OF ALTERNATING CURRENT. EFFORTS TO SAVE THE LIFE OF THE PERSON EXECUTED SEEMED TO HAVE THEIR ROOTS IN THE INTEREST OF KEEPING THE PUBLIC CALM ABOUT DANGERS OF ALTERNATING CURRENT RATHER THAN IN HUMANE MOTIVATION. CASE LAW AND REFERENCES ARE CITED. (DEP)