Weekly Trinity journal., 1860-01-21

and support of four hundred and seventy-one
prisoners, with prospective increase.
The subsequent decrease in the cost OF living,
and the manifest bad workings of the plan adop-
ted in 1856, soon attracted public attention, and
II became apparent that the State was paying
very dear for the service rendered. Upon the
26th of December, 1857. the last warrant for the
monthly payment of $4,000 to the Lessee was
issued, and in February, 1858, the Legislature
passed u law authorizing the Governor TO take
possession of the prison. thus Nbrogattng ny en-
actmcnt its own contract This was an uarump-
tion of power belonging to the Courts only, and
however odious or hard the State 5 engagements
it should have been adhered to by it ms one of
the contracting parties until the only proper tr-
buna. under the Constitution could have N'ssed
upon u question purely judicial From March ],
1858, to May l3 1852 the State continued in
charge of the prison. ut which time it was restored
by decree of the Supreme Court to the sub
Lessee. The sum expended by the State for its
maintenance during this time, including the
amount adiudgod to be paid for the unlawful en-
try was Slll,lSl 90 The Sub Lessecs, alleging
their ability to comply with the contract OF
March, 1856, now claim by suit the price therein
stipulated, from Dec. &c, 1851 to the present
time, amounting to near S25O,0OO To add To
the complex nature Of this veXed subject, there
is also a claim for $4,000, charged as the value
of the personal property of the Sub Lessee seized
by the State Government rs State property upon
March |, 1858. 1t is clear to my mind that,
equitably the Sub-Lessees are not entitled to the
contract price whilst the State was Mt the expense
Of carrying on this institution but whether they
are legally it is for the Courts to determine IL
will be found by reference to the reports ana
examination, that there is such confusion ana
mixing up of public and private property that,
were there no other reason, this alone would
demonstrate the necessity OF ending litigation
and contentious alike ruinous to the state ahd
the parties in adverse interest. earnestly rec
ommend to the Legislature tae appointing OF
select committee to inquire into all these matters.
to confer with the Sub Lessee upon basis OF
fair and equitable adjustment of all disputes, to
report the sum deemed proper aud right to oe
paid by the State and, acting in conciiiatery
| spirit, ii will at once appropriate such sum Us
may seem just, and terminate forever this com
picaton in the management OF one-the most
! mportant-of our public institutions. aul as
surcd that Committee will be met IN proper
| spirit by those Interested in the contract ID
| however, all attempts at an amicable settlemenl
| fail then trust that law will ut once be passed.
! authorizing suit TO be brought against tho Nlalp
| in order that the Courts may decide speedily al
the questions involved So rs this Is aeaVhiTs
plished a law should be passed specifically regu-
latng the management of the prison, provldluB
for an election of Warden aud other officers.
making them directly answerabe to either the
Legislature or TO The people for the faithful dis
charge of their duties The solitary confinement
of the convcts, except when laboring, their san
itary regulation, and The division Of their large
number, by locating u Branch Prison ut some
point accessible, and endowed with great natural
advantages, should follow. The turning of con
vict labor TO their own subsistence the gradual
relief Of the State from the burthen Of their sup
port, Is feasible and within the compass OF the
present representatives of the people. There IL
no reason why their own industry should not
only be made profitable by being directed in me-
chanical pursuits not conflicting with free labor.
but even to be source of economy to the state
in the preparation of materials and the erection
Of our public buildings.
For the cOnsummation OF all these ideas thud
generally foreshadowed, | shall hold myself IN
readiness at all times to cooperate with the
Legislature, to whose discretion aud wisdom
their execution must Of necessity be chiefly ln-
trusted
In connection with this subject, desire to ex-
press my views upon the power of pardonlng
convicts, as vested in the Executive by the Con
stitution.
During the past eight years lGG oonvicts have
received Executive clemcncy being nearly one
eleventh of the entire number imprisoned, inde-
pendent Of escapes deaths and discharges.
From this statement, it would appear that
either the Courts have been influenced by passion
or uniustfable haste or that the power OF re-
leving criminals Of tho judgement of " Aw
has been un unwarrantably exercised. Which 10 the
case, it is not my province to even surmlse. But
am sure that the trainers OF our compact OF
Government never designed that the pardoning
power vested in the Executive was to he used to
thwart the judgement Of the Courts. The Eowor
to pardon is q mere Incident to the execution OF
the law, intended to aid its just operations
never to set IL at defiance When sentance IL
once passed the Courts become powerless1; and
though subsequently it may appear, duripg tbs
n
cred evidence, that the person 20 convicted Is
innocent, or new facts may show that tho judg-
ment is too severe, no power exists IN thg Court
to remedy the wrong. Then, and then oA " does
the Constitution design that the Executive shall
step in aud arrest by his decree the unD DIst rigor
of the law. In this respect, he is but part OF
its matured policy, and acts in pursuance of u
provision at once necessary and humane. | am
aware that the Governor often finds himself in u
very trying position, when he is presented with
petitions signed by the officers of the Court aud
the jury who tried the criminal, recommending
Executive clemcncy, accompanied, as they often
are, by the fearful prayers and solicitations OF
distressed and almost heart broken friends aud
relatives These petitions are often signed with
out reflection and more to avoid opportunities
than from real belief that the convict should
be freed from the penalty Of his crime. The re-
sponsibility, involving often the terrible issue
of life or death, is thus easily and oftentmes
th0ushtlessy cast upon the Executive.
If our laws were always certain of execution.
how seldom would be their infractiou. IT in our
State, as in older political communities, the vo
laton of rights of life, liberty and property,
promptly met by punishment, regardless of per-
sous, how much more seldom would they be set
at defiance. Too often powerful friends and i'm
proper influences mock at and arrest the enforce
ment Of the penalty incurred.
My duty is TO my mind plain under the Const-
which | dn hav tn
although my sympathies and feelings as an ndi-
vidual may often prompt me 10 exercise this pow
er and free the criminal from the punishment ad-
judged, will not, with my understanding of my
duty as an officer of the law, pardon any one un-
less | am satisfied by iudubitable evidence, that
the Court originally rendering the judgment
would have done dilIvren:ly il the same facts
presented to me had been before it prior to its
final action.
The proposed Act granting franchise for the
construction Of bulkhead in the har' - OF San
Francisco will doubtless be brought 4 ~ con.