The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1874-01-31

AfAA' etNfht W NitttAbt III ttNitW lDl kHfk nc
hon2 VT, TO 20 about absolying Davis from
the sentence Of the law, involves lust such a
review rs that and if there be any doubt as
to whether the notification Of the judgment OF
Court is or is not an invasion OF the powers
OF the Judicial Department, there certainly
can be none as TO whether total release or
partial exception from punishment, by legis-
lative action, is usnrpation Of one of the
powers of the Executive. The Legislature al
this point is hedged in by the plainest prohi.
billions from all sides.
1t would do less violence to the spirit Of all
law and to the letter Of the Constitution, if On
act had been passedin advance, declaring that
Davis might commit violence and crime with
out let or hindrance. A special act relieving
him from accountability in the courts would
have been just us well, for there is just as
much power in the Legislature to PREJUDICE a
case as to review and set aside the judgment
passed in it.
An act suspending the laws as to Joseph
w. Davis would have saved the expense and
trouble, at least, Of the idle pageant OF trial,
the mockery Of verdict, and tie empty pomp
Of judgment and sentence.
Such legislation, to some minds, might find
warrant in the ninth article of the Bill OF
Rights. II might seem to be suspension
Of the laws by the Legislature, in favor Of a
particular individual, just as King james had
declared them suspended, in favor Of class
Of people 1t would have been, to the appre.
henson of some people, the exercise Of a
power precisely like that which the Parlia-
ment of 1888 denied to the king, the only
difference being that the king suspended the
laws in favor Of large number or class OF
people, and because he desired to relieve
them from the prosecutions of religious intol-
erance, whilst, in this case, il would be oper-
alive only in behalf Of one single individual
with no sort of claim whatever TO the tolera-
ton Of the law. But, now, after the party
has been tried, convicted, and sentenced to
attempt to intervene, and break down the
solemn Judgments of courts and hinder, delay
or ObStTItct The due course of law, or the exc
cution thereof is, il possible, something even
worse than that. For, it is not only an un.
disguised encroachment on the powers of the
judicial, and direct usurpation of the powers
Of the Executive Department, but it is setting
a precedent of the worst character.
To minds accustomed to look with venera.
ton upon those plain and guarded limitations
of power that have so long been at once the
boast and shield of n free and law-abiding
people, the proposition made here is well cal
culated to occasion alarm. Any countenance
given TO this attemptto involve the Legislature
in the consideration of questions and issues
committed by the plain sense of the Constitu.
ton to the judicial Department on the one
hand, or the Executive on the other, will ripen
into practice that will very soon destroy all
those "checks and balances which stand
distributedin such admirable precision around
the several departments Of Government.
Those cautious notifications, which peo
pie, jealous Of encroachments, and fearful of
concentrations Of power, have adopted TO de.
fine, limit, and restrictive several departments
of their Government, will soon disappear.
One taste of such power, would only sharp.
en- the appetite for more, and each repetition
of the experiment would only add strength to
a succeeding one. The business would not
and could not be confined to the convict at
the foot of the gallows. Every felon in the
penitentiary, every vagrant in the common
Jail would have his attorneys, his s.evidence'
and records before the Legislature, and
with precisely the same shoe Of right that is
claimed here, demand and be entitled to n
hearing of his case.
We would have here precedent, too, be.
fore which one of the most conservative eLe.
ments of public opinion would soon fall
bleeding and lifeless to the ground.
The most sacred sentiment that ennobes
and purihes the administration of public law,
is that which knows nothing Of politics or
partisan favorites or questions in the court
house. But this would be to throw directly
into the very whirlpool of politics and partisan
strites that which all men feel, in their deep.
est convictions, would be most fatal to public
law, and most deadly to private right and jus.
tice. Partisan intrigues, combinations,
cliques, eabals and coteries would rule su.
preme.
The tall and stately criminal the man
clothed with wealth and power, and sustained
by social and political influence the low and
practiced politician, with whose services the
wealthy and aspiring could not dispense
these ioould nerer be brought TO justice. A
crowned prince would have no reason to
suspend the laws us to them.
The ninth section of the Bill of Rights
would enfold such offenders with panoply
which the solemn judgments of the Courts
could never penetrate and surround them
with immunities which the severest and most
pointed denunciations of law could not assal
For supple and plant Legislature could
easily be obtained who would suspend the
laws by breaking down the power, and
taking possession.of the functions both of the
Judicial and Executive Departments. do
not, Of course, see Joseph Davis in all this.
only see the destruction Of n long established
and yenerated bulwark, which has stood for
ages, between the peace, order and security
of the people, and lawlessness, misrule and
injustice.
shall be no party to any such proceeding
as this. have neither been notified of the
proposition to take up the case of Davis by a
joint committee Of the General Assembly, nor
oil nr a0raa1 in any u.ay a., la thara q,
''represent the State. And if an official
engagement at Cumberland did not positively
forbid my being there certainly would not,
without compulsion, participate in any such
action, and thereby become party to q
precedent like this.
II is proper also, in this connection, it
should be known, that what is about to be
published as the "evidence' in the case, has
never been certified as such by any member
Of the Court before which the case of Davis
was tried; and until its publication, lam quite
certain has never been read by any person
representing the State in the case. By what
authority il is called the "eridence in The case
is more than ] can conceive of. 1t may set
forth all the evidence. | have never read it,
But can safely say, and it is due to those
who heard the trial and held cognizance of
the case, and to the jurors who pronounced
the verdict, to say that, if it contains no more
of the facts in the case than are sketched in
the memorial which is the foundation Of
these proceedings now before the committee,
it is not full statement of the evidence in
the case nor is IL anything like the whoie
case. Many facts are omitted, others but
imperfectly stated, and some again not set
down in the order and connection which
clothed them with significance.
Perhaps it may not be improper to add
another word. Whilst cannot suppose that
the opinions !, or any other individual, may
have entertained respecting the guilt or limo
cence of Davis can, ought TO have anything to
do with his case, or can, or ought to influence
the action of any person in the premises, il is
due TO myself to say that what has been re.
ported to Judge Maulsby as my opinion on
this subject, is not correct. never held any
communication with Judge Maulsby himself
on the subject, and never entertained any
such opinions as to the innocence of Davis, OF
the force and effect of the evidence in the
case, rs is ascribed to me in the memorial
before the General Assembly.
A. X. SYEsTER.
Hageysfo,ca, January "a, 1871.
BEFORE THE LEGisIATuRE.-The case OF
Joseph W. Davis, under sentence of death for