Holmes County Republican. [volume] (Millersburg, Holmes Co., O. [Ohio]) 1870-1895, 1873-03-27
FOSTERS FATE.
Letter from Governor Dix
He Declines to Interfere
Human Life Must be Pro
tected.

New YORK, March Il. - Governor
Dix has written letter to Rev. DIR.
Tying, declining to interpose executive
authority i'm the case of Foster, under
Avery Putnam, and stating the circum-
stances and considerations on which his
decision is founded. A large part of
the letter is devoted to a review of the
facts of the murder and the efforts
made to obtain from the higher courts,
including that of the last resort, re-
versal of the decision of the lower
courts. The Governor says the evi-
dence demonstrates the murder to have
been premeditated; that the weapon
used was murderous one, a fact which
Foster, having been a street car conduc-
tor, well knew when he deliberately
chose it as the means of accomplishing
his purpose. The question presented to
me, says the Governor, is, whether l
shall interpose the executive authority
of the State and commute the penalty
of death, which the law awards to muir
der, for Imprisonment for life. In sup
port of the application it is urged that
the verdict was accompanied with a
Recommendation to mercy, and that it is
the duty of the executive to consider
the one as part of the other.
This verdict and accompanying re-
commendation, together with the state
ments and affidavits of large majori-
ty of the jurors declaring that some of
their number did not believe Foster in
tended to kill Putnam; that they
thought imprisonment for life as
great punishment as he deserved, |
and that they would not have agreed to
render verdict of murder i'm the first
degree if they had not been assured by
one of their associates, who professed
to have knowledge of law, that YER
dict coupled with recommendation
would secure Communication of the SEN
tence, the Governor states, have been
source of great anxiety to him in COM
ing to a right decision; but to admit
the precedent of admitting after-reve-
latiOns of secret consultations of the
jury room for the purpose of annulling
q verdict rendered as true under the So
lemnity of an oath, would be perilous
IN any condition of society, and in the
present defiant reign of crime such a
precedent would be fraught with in
finite danger to public order. With a
firm conviction that there was no error
in the ruling of the Judge at the trial,
md that the evidence freely warranted
The jury in rendering verdict of mur-
Ter in the first degree, there is nothl ng
n the case which can justly commend
t to executive clemency, and he cannot
nterpose to mitigate the punishment.
If he did disregard the evidence and
Judgment of the courts the inevitable
effect would be to impair the force of
judicial decisions and break down the
barriers which the law has set up for
he protection of life.
So far as depends on me, the supre-
macy of law will be inflexibly main
aimed. Every man who strikes MUIR
lerous blow at the life of his fellow
must be made to feel his own is in GER
ain peril. II we cannot by firmness of
purpose attain this end, we may soon be
orced to acknowledge the dishearten-
ng truth that there is nothing so cheap
,r so i'll protected as human life.