Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1874-02-21
C4PITAL PUNISHMENT:


against any change of the law in capital cases
!. The present system oftrying such cases
BY one Judge was adopted upon the recon-
mendation of Attorney General Appleton,
who had had experience under both systems.
His reasons are found on page four of his re-
port for 1859,
Since about that year, another reason has
existed. If majority of the Judges were
obliged to attend such trials, an increase of
their number would be necessary in order to
do the business of the Court
Another grave reason is, that it is impossi.
bic 10 discuss aud decide intelligently, in the
excitement of trial, the grave questions OF
Law that arise in the case. Under our pres
en-: system, an opportunity is given for tina,
thorough and cool argument and examination
of such questions that conduce 80 greatly to
correct decision.
=. l do not propose to discuss the question
of capital punishment, bat to give the statis-
tics of our own experience, which seem to
be entirely ignored CT misapprehended !
shall not undertake to speak with precise ac
curacy till since 1859. After the execution
of Sager in 1888, there was no case till
Thorns in 1913 In tie meantime IN 1850
was III terms continued, but ii was provided
that 1t should not be inflicted within one year
after sentence, nor until the record had been
certified To the Supreme Executive, and he
hal do
anybody duty to certify the record to the
Governor. One feature OF this law IS exceed
ingly bad. /; left the sentence of death hang
ing over the convict all his life, and the Gov
ernor could issue his waTran. whenever he
saw Fl, to do so. Il one Governor did not,
another could; and nj one time, there were
in our State Prison five or six men, whom
the Governor could have had hung any day lie
pleased. In 1869 the Legislature amended
/ the law, removing this feature OF it. 1t still
/ leaves the convict year to reflect on his crime
ard its consequences it is made the duty Of
the court to certify the record to the Cover
nor who is commanded to issue his warrant
at the end Of the year TO execute the convict,
2
I The Constitution gives the Governor and
/ Council the power to pardon (Which includes
commuta.ion) and no Law can take it away.
/ They are sworn to execute thl Law, and as it
they find sufficient reason for committing the
sentence. If the minority bill is enacted, the
Governor and Council still can do as they can
do now, and practically, the law is explicit
and certain enough as it ia. The law of 1873 !
was in time construed to intend to abolish
practically capital punishment When that
construction was first given, cannot ascer
tain, but it was no: fully settled till 1853. In
deed | cannot ascertain that the record was
ever certified to the Governor till the Knight
case in 81, though it probably was in the Cool
/ idge case. 1t does net appear to have been
in Thorn's case, and Gov. Dana in 1913 calls
| the attention OF the Legislature to the fact
/ that until the record is so certified, no war
rant can issue, and that there was no law re-
curing the record to be certified.
! In 1919, in the Coolidge case, Gov. Dana
/ decided tina! the law made it his duty to ex-
ecute the convict or commute the sentence,
/ and the sentence was committed. lie report
ed his decision to the Legislature that "their
silence might sanction the view of the imper
alive character Of the law, or their disapprov
al reverse it" and the Legislature were silent
But in 1858, Gov. Morrill, decided Gin the
! Knight case that the practical construction
was that changing is played out, and de-
cined to issue his warrant for the execution
Of Knight In 1859 there was one conviction
for murder. In $780, there were two capital
trials, resulting in one acquittal and one con-
viction. In the three years, 1861, 1862 and
/ 1868, SsreH persons were sentenced to death,
and at the close of 1868 two cases were pend
ing after verdict of guilty Of murder in the
first degree in which the same sentence was
pronounced and two other cases were pending
in which the same result Was reached. One
of the sentences, however, was for crime
committed in 1860; deducting that we have
TEN persons sentenced TO death for Offences
and no tro Of them for the same offence.
This terrible record has no parallel in the his
tory Of the State, thus showing the error of
the allegation that capital offences have large
ly increased since 1869. In 1861 there were
eleven cases before the court in which a cap
ital offence was originally charged, in two
cases (of arson a mol pros was entered in
two others, the indictment was for man
slaughter; in one other the plea of guilty of
manslauGhter was accepted; in one other,
the accused was adj judged insane and sent to
the Insane Hospital; two were convicted of
manslaagkter and three convicted and SEN
fenced 10 death. In 1862, there were three
cases trieG result, one conviction, one ac-
quittal, ana one not pres, after the evidence
was out. In 1868, six new cases were before
the court in which the death penalty was f.
Hally pronounced; one, in which the accused
died before trIal; one in which the verdict
was marslaughter; besides these there was
one murder, the two perpetrators of which
were killed in resisting arrest. In 1864, there
was one conviction in a new case, and in
another case the accused died before trial.
7 In 1860, there were three new cases, two of
, which resulted in acquittals and one in YER
dict Of mansaughter. In 1867, there were
} four new cases which resulted in one convic-
= ton of murder in the first loyrna oue ron