Weekly national intelligencer., 1851-05-10
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.
., THE ABUSES OF THE PARDoNING POWER.

ON THE ABUSES OF THE PARDONiNG PoWEk
We find in The last Annual Report OF the !" Pr-
90, Association" of the State OF New York, print
ed by the Legislature, an able paper from the pen
&C The distinguished Professor LIEBER, of South
Carolina College, on The Pardoning Privilege
and lis Abuse" Although the subject is one of
especial interest TO Legislators and TO those magis
,rates in whose hands the delicate power OF life and
death is placed, it is also Of much general nte
rest as to warrant the insertion of Prot. LIEBER's
paper on 1t entire He treats the question, as the
reader will discover, with great ability and with
that philosophical discrimination and learning which
mark all his writings.
THE PARDoNING PRIVILEGE AND ITS ABUSE.
The hardening privilege consists in the authority partially
or hoy to remit the penalty which, IN the due and egu
Ia, con,e Of ustice has been inflicted for some offence
pardou is always act Of frustrating that common Justice
h;h has been established by law the best of pro-
,sc,n nuli6caton of legal justice. It is the only power
.; osrn politics in which the supremacy Of the law is ac-
knovIedeed as the primary condition of liberty that can be
compared in any degree the veto Of the ancient tribune
II is an irregular power, depending upon irresponsible ind
ydusl will We ought therefore, clearly to be convinced Of
its necessy and if this be proved, we ought to inquire
whether 50 extraordinary power must not be guarded by
proper limitations especially if II should be found that i
liable to be seriously and even aarmingy abused.
In order to understand fully the whole subject it will
NOT be apaiss if we endeavor to OBTAIN view Of the origin Of
this power and why that every where find it
attribute Of the chief executive power whether this
fact must be attributed to any nhsreas CHARACTERISTICS or 70
incidental circumstances. .t
When all goyenmentis yet mixed up with the family re-
aon and the individual views o the ruler alone prevail ne
prdons as matter Of course whenever he sees proper and
feels mpeled soto but developed despotsm over exten.
sve States takes q different view Fear Of insecurity, and
suspicion Of dsobedehcs the commands Of the desPo
lead the ruler fence himself in with strict prohibition OF
applications for pardon That which wise people does for
vruous purposes by constitutions namely, the establishing
in calm times Of rules Of action for mpsssloned periods dis
trusting its power Of resisting undue impulses and thus
limiting its power the despot does from fear of bis own weak
ness and therefore limits bis own absolute power that be may
not be enspped into pardon of dsobedience Chardnf
tells US that in his time was in Persia, highly penal to sue
for pardon for ones self for another person the was
capital offence under the Roman Emperoat least under
all the yrss among them, who form the great majority Of
the fearful list Still it clear that the last and highest
ower the real sovereign no only the supreme power must
include the power Of padonng and as in Athens the as
sembed people had the right Of remng penaies does
the civil law acknowledge the privilege in the emperor who
was supposed be the sovereign and acknowledged the
source Of all law. Christianity confirmed all these views
The mercy Of the Deity Of its chief dogmas mercy
therefore, came also be considered one of the choicest
attributes Of the ruler, who the hand held
to be the yicsseent of God and the other the
reign source law and justice, can be denied that in
times when laws yet n very dsordered state, the at
.s and ha ~ vdonin
flowing great importance and. upon the WHOLE
probably Of great benefit to the people The fact that the
pardoning power necessarily originated with the sovereign
power and that the rulers considered the soveegns
the reason Why when jurss treat of the subject
they invariably presrnsed shute ndelibly nhering
in the crown The monarch alone considered the nd
putabe dispenser Of pardon; and this again the historical
reason why have always granted the padonng privilege
to the chief executive because he stands if any vsiby
does in the place Of the monarch Of other nations forgetting
thai the monarch had the parong not because he is
the chief executive but because he considered the
eisn-,he ssufcient power from which all others flow
while with us Governor President has but delegated
power and limited sphere Of action, which by no means inn
plies that we necessarily naturally delegate along
with the executive power, also the pardonng authority
Although the pardoning power has always existed and has
been abandoned by ultra desposm for the sake Of desposm
ITSELF yet the abuse which easily leads and the apparent
incongruy which it involves have induced many men Of
deep reflection, in ancient well in modern tines to
raise their voices against Of whom may mention Pa-
to and Ccerol among the ancents and Pastore1 Serin
Fangier and the benevolent Beccaa among the moderns.
The latter The pioneer Of penal REFORM and Of the
factors Of mankind has the following remarkable passage
As punishmen.s become mild clemency and pardon
are necessary Happy the nation 10 which they will be
considered dangerous Clemency, which has often been
deemed sufficient substitute for every other virtue in sove-
reigns should be excluded n perfect legislation where pun
hrnens are mild and the proceedings in criminal cases
gular and expeditions This truth may cruel to those
who live n countries WHERE from the absurdy OF the laws
and the severity Of punshmen.s pardons and the cmency
Of are necessary IL indeed, the nobles
prerogatves Of the throne but at the time tc dis
appreciation Of the laws Cemency virtue which belong.
TO the legislator and not TO the executor Of the laws virtue
which ought shine in the code and In private udg
ment To show mankind that crimes sometimes pardon
ed and that punishment s not necessary consequence
nourish the Aaering hope Of mpuny, is the Of he
considering every punishment inflicted Of injustice
and oppression The prince In pardonng, gives up the pub
lie security in favor Of individual and by -udged bene
violence proclams public act Of impunty. Let then the
legislator be tender, indugent, and humane"
Among the truths Of this passage there some errors the
exhibition or which win lead us to the consideration
whether the pardonng power having already been admitted
extraordinary and superficial one be necessary at al
well and literally constituted Government or ough, "a
be suffered in community which acknowledges the soye
regny OF the law Beccara says that mency should be
excluded in perfect Legislation, and that pardon s tac
dsappobsion Of the law This is erroneous No lesisla.
ton can ever be perfect in the n which is taken here