Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1873-02-14
the Eamp1ey Murder-Htstory of Tucker.

pardon of Albert p. Tucker, ahs Charles
M. Heslen, who is now in Jail charged
with being connected with the murder of
the late Mrs. Lampley. He is lative of
Connecticut, and had been since he war
and until 1865 engaged in buying and
selling horses at Washington. H was
convicted in October, 1866, in Charleseoun-
ty for horse stealing, In three cases and
sentenced to seventeen years and eight
months in the Penitentiary. In 1866 up
plication was made for his pardon, andhe
was recommended by the Mayor of New
Haven, the Sheriff and the City Clerk d
New Haven, the Judge of Probate, G. L
Chaplain, a Marylander living in New Ha
ven, editors of the Daily Register, Attorney
General Ingersoll, Governor English, Mr.
Scranton, President of the Shore Line Rail
way, and others. They stated that his
character had been good priorto the con
viction. The Warden of the Penitentiary
General John w. Horn, strongly urged his
pardon, and stated in his letter that his
conduct has been such chat he has beer
promoted to position of trust" In 1876
a committee ofthe Legislature recommend
ed his pardon, and again in 1872 similar
committee likewise recommended him.
In November, 1872, the application was
renewed, and Governor English, Hon. Co
lin M. Ingersoll, ex-Member of Congress
and Attorney General of Connecticut, Hon
James Gallagher, brother of the late Fran,
els Gallagher, Esq, and other prominent
citizens of Connecticut pressed his case
upon the Governor. Hon. Joshua Vansant
who rarely interferes, made an earnest APP
peal, closing in~these words, "believine
that the law of the State has been fully
indicated by his incarceration for six
years, and in view of his good conduct as
a prisoner" he recommended his pardon
James s. Waters, ESQ.,, late President Of
the Board of Directors, certified that he
had been twice recommended by boards
of directors. John F. Hunter, ESQ.,, the
President of the present Board, also unit
ed in recommending him, and Robert Rem
wick, Esq, formerly Director, was very
active in his behalf There was but one
person who protested, and that was the
gentleman whose horses had been stolen
The punishment seemed to be too great
for the offence, viz: seventeen years and
eight months for stealing three horses, and
the Governor thought six years imprison-
time merited Executive clemency, but as
he was not citizen of Maryland he was
required to leave the State and never re-
turn.
We take the above from a number of the
Baltimore american, which came to hand
after our last issue. Come, neighbor, strike
out the "buyingn and say that Hesslin was
engaged in stealing and selling horses,
If you will. By the way, it puzzles us
to find out how in the mischief you got
hold of those precious extracts from the
letters of Gen. Horn and Mayor Vansant
Governor Whyte is .signally fortunate in
having alert friends, and somebody ap-
pears to be not at all slow to avail of that
generous friendship for the Governors
special vindication.
There were protests already on file a.
gainst the pardon of Hesslin. Not one Of
the protestants, as far as we can learn, has
ever recalled or regretted his signature
and we do know that if the usual notice OF
the application for pardon, in November
last, had been given, those protests would
have been strenuously renewed. AS it was
the one gentleman who succeeded in get
ting letter to the Governor had to have
it mailed at postoffice remote from his
usual place for mailing matter. Our neigh
Dor seems to have the points in the case
can he tell us why only seven days notice
of Hesslin's application for pardon was
given-a compliance with the statute law
it is true, but barely so, and certainly not
a compliance with precedents and the prac-
tice uniformly authorized by custom-in
such casesa If it was wrong for the Gov
ernor to interfere in the case of Craig with.
out the assent Of the Judge, why was il
right for him to do otherwise in the case
of Hesslin? Why should he be in such
hot haste to send Hesslin back to his ma
in Connecticut What right has Gov,
ernor Whyte, or any one else, be he private
citizen or public official, to sit in judg
ment upon the judicial adjudications o:
the Courts of this State and nullify thei1
very claims, not only to authority, but ever
to ordinary responsibility We have al
ways understood that one branch of the
government has no right to inquire into
the acts of its coordinate; under what
pretence of right, then, does the Governor
turn this man loose because s'the punish
ment seemed too great for the offence gu
The severity of a sentence, as well as the
good conduct of prisoner, we can well
see, are legitimate subjects for considera
ton when, after conviction and sentence
a reasonable probability of his innocence
is justified on the ground of newly discov
cred evidence. No shield of this KIND
protects the Executive action in this case
no charge of irregularity in the jury il
made, no informality in the verdict is al
legged. By his action in this case Governor
Whyte simply tells the jurors who convict
ed, that they had no right to convict, and
the Judge who sentenced, that he inflicted
a punishment he had no right to infict.-
When he does that, Notwithstanding the
urgency of amiable gentlemen, who are
readily moved by compassion, or easily
deluded by hypocrisy, he arrogates to him
self power not warranted by the law, te
the faithful and just execution of which ht
is pledged.