New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1870-02-17
UpOyG AND An INSULT.

Gov Hoffman has seen fit, very properly, 10
publisb n list of the pardOns, reprleves ana
combinations of sentence, granted by nm
during his first year of service Mt Albany. III
is an instructive record, and fully sustans the
judgment to Which we have already given
utterance, that, while Executives sometimes
pardon those who should have been kept
longer in durance, they far oftener refuse TO
pardon when the claims of justice have Deen
fully satisfied and those Of mercy arc entitled
to be heard And for this there is obvious
reason. Convicts are not a popular class; I'M
detected rascas are particularly hard upon
them: and a Governor likes to stand well
with the masses who make regulations
and carry elections, and these are mainly
outside of prison walls. He may mean to DO
exactly right-he generally does-but he can
help knowing and feeling that votes nave
quito often been lost by pardoning OF COM
muting, very seldom by letting sentences
RIM their course. His interest is on the SIDE OF
ricor. and he seldom contravenes it. Sometimes
he leans to mercy's side and pardons or com
mutes where popular sentiment demands the
utmost infection; and this exposes HIM to sucn
a clamor that he resolves not to err on Mo'
side again. Thus we believe that, while UoV-
errors are no worse, but are probably Detter'
than the average of their fellow men, they
keen two conyicts in who should be let ont
where they let one out who should be kept ln'
These structures have no especial reference
TO Gov. Hoffman, who seems to act IN the
premises with pains-taking deliberation. ana
who. we Judge, has made as few mistakes as
Tho averope of his predecessors.
But there is one grievOus wrong Tor when
neither were they nor is he responsible except
that they do not seem to have made proper
efforts to have it righted. We allude to the
iniouity of pardoning men for oilenses they
never committed. Take these two specimens
from Gov. Hoffman's catalogue:
Feb os-Thonas Peasants, convicted November IT, 1863
of grand larceny; Kings County; term two years
The prisoner was convicted of the larceny OF horse
no proper defense His innocence Is now es.aDsneu US
undoubted evidence. The Judge District attorney anu
complainant have no doubt Of his innocence
Sent G-Ieyi Conger, convicted March y, 1867 OF Dur
gary and larceny Ontario County; :erm TWO years;
The Judge aud District Attorney unite IN stating tat
,,ct ~b'cI have come TO light since the trial establish
the innocence Of Conger, OF whose CUNT they hau sono
The guilty party has since confessed and stated that
Conger had no connection with the crime.
What under heaven have these men done
that they should be pdrdonedP Do they need
pardon for having been falsely accused, I'M
properly tried, unjustly convicted, thrust into
the company of felons, robbed OF their time,
their liberty, their earnings, and subjected to
every sort of injustice and indignityf IL law
and justice were identical, these poor men
wopld be paid at least $1,000 each fq the in
Justice they have endured at the hands OF the
State. We are not assuming that they wore
Intentionally wronged-we assume that every
thing was done in honesty and good faith; but
if ever man had just claim against the State
of New-York these, and hundreds more who
have likewise suffsrsd tho penalty of wrongful
accusation and mistaken conviction, have such
a claim.
we ask the Judiciary Committees of the two
Houses to mature and report bill providing
that each convict whose innocence shall be es-
tablished shall theleupon be discharged from
prison with an explicit attestati0n OF his inno-
cence, and Mt least an expression of official re-
gret that he has been called to suffer thus I'M
Justly. If we cannot redress his grieyous
wrongs, let US at least stop insulting him with
this insolent mockery of pardon for an oifense
he is now known to have never committed