Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-01-08
rHEEFFECT OF THE PREsI DENT s
PARDON.

Law apprentices have a great pro-
pensity 10 air their legal virginity,
andgenerally take advantage of every
occasion that offers to perform for
it that healthful service. The recent
pardon proclamation of the Presi-
dent has brought them out, says the
Cincinnati Enquirer, as the spring
sun draws flies from their winter
quarters, and they 'humbly submit"
TO the public that the pardon of the
President is valueless, as none of the
parties embraced by it have been
convicted, and that, until conviction
be had, the President has nothing
upon which to prediea.e a pardon
As these young gentlemen have
hardly progressed in their readings
to the reports of the Supreme Court
Of the United States, we quote from
one of the decisions of that body,
TO show the extent of the pardoning
power of the President, and its effect
upon the party intended to be bene-
fitted by the Executive clemency.
That court says:
Tho constitution provides that the
President shall have power to grant par>
dons for offenses against the United
States, except in cases Of impeachment.
The power thus conferred IS unlimited,
with the exception stated. 1t extends
to every offense known to the law, and
may be exercised at any time after its
commission, either before legal proceed
ings are taken, or during their tendency,
or after conviction and judgment. The
power Of the President is not subject to
legislative control. Congress can neither
limit the effect Of this pardon nor ex-
clude from its exercise any class of Of
tenders. The benign prerogatives of
mercy reposei in him can not be fet-
tered by any Legislative restrictions
1t will be seen from this decision
of the Supreme Court of the United
States, that the power to pardon
given to the President by the con-
stitution, and that it may be exer-
cised at any time after the commits
sion of the offense, either before
legal proceedings are taken, or dur
ing their tendency, or after conyic-
ton and judgment.
The court goes further. 1t de
clares that the pardoning power
vested in the President is beyond
the control of Congress--that Con
gress has no control whatever over
it-that it belongs to the President
and to him alone-and that Con-
gress can neither limit the effect Of |
the Presidents pardon, nor exclude
from its exercise any class of of
tenders.
The effect and operation of a par
don are equally clear. As "the be-
nign prerogative Of mercy reposed |
in him Uhe President) can not be |
fettered by any Legislative restric-
tion," the pardon reaches both the
punishment prescribed for the Of
Tense and the guilt of the offender
and when it is full, as is that of the |
Presidents proclamation of Deem
Der % "it releases the punishment
and 6lots out of existence the guilt,
so that, in the eye Of the law, the
party pardOned is as innocent as if
he had never committed the offense."
Says the court in continuation
"If the pardon is granted before
conviction it prevents any of
the penalties and disabilities con-
sequentupon conviction from attach
ing; if granted after conviction it
removes the penalties and disabili-
ties, and restores him to all his civil
rights; it makes him, as it were, a
new man, and gives him a new
credit and capacity"
Any thing that Congress may do
TO limit the effect and operation of a
full pardon by the President would
be a usurpation of power, and an
attempted violation of the public
faith.