The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1874-04-16
s. G..
Thursday Moraing. April 1s. 1874
ConvIoss At Largo.

AAOs
eonviots turned loose upon the ,mmu-
nifty last Sunday, unprovided with the
means Of getting away, and acting :a.-
bulently in the passages of the State
House. making the air vocal with their
curses. the Governor published card
in the several journals, yesterday, to
the effect that he had personally investi-
gated the cases Of several convicts on
Sunday, and had granted pardon to only
five OF them. He disavows any know
ledge ef the others who we're alleged to
be likewise liberated. and says elf they
have been released, it was without his
knowledge or consent" But the Co.
vernon does not meet the matter fairly.
It is not yet placed on satisfactory
basis. We have been accustomed to the
gross abuse of the pardoning power by
the Executive for several years. It was
crying evil under Scott. It has hardly
been diminished under his successor.
we have to submit. We suppose. al there
IS no way to check this wantonness Of
power. But il the Governor cannot be
controlled in the number he may par
don or reprieve, if he is the sole Judge
of the considerations Which are to
weigh for or against the exercise of the
power, he is not allowed to be so free in
the manner in which he shall exercise it.
Under the Constitution it is an official
'ect; the pardon is to be granted by the
authority of the State, sealed with the
great seal Of the State, signed by the
: >a9oveDnor, and countersigned by the
Secretary of State. All these arc me-
cencomitants OF a pardon, and
Involve the keeping of careful record.
But according to our neighbor, the
Union. Herald, which speaks by the card,
they were all lacking. "It is not pre-.
tended" it says, ''ihat these pardons
Eeze Eeanted in this manner. We said
yesterday that inquiry was made at the
Governors Office and Mt the Office of the
Secretary Of State, but there was no
record in either Office of the pardon of
these men. If the pardons were not
sealed with the great seal. nor counter
signed by the Secretary of State, as the
absence Of any record in his Office
shows they were not, in what lawful
sense can these men be said to have
been pardoned7 The Governor seems
to have acted on the assumption that he
has the right to direct general or par
tial jail delivery by the mere word OF
his mouth. We deny the assumption.
II the Governor pardoned verbally
only FIVE oonviots, the question arises,
how did the others-twenty-two, more
or less-get out of the penitentiary7 1t
seems to admit OF no question that
considerable number were let loose.
They themselves put the number at
tweEty seven. The Governor, or his
Private Secretary, has failed to clear up
this point. He AYERS that he has not
given his consent to the discharge of
more than five. Bnt five times five and
more are no longer in their cells. They
appear to have been enlarged at the
same time with and to be in company
with those whom the Governor admits
he pardoned and let out. The Governor
having declared that he is responsible
FOR the liberation OF only five. who is
responsible for the others2 Mr.. Dennis
will, perhaps. be good enough to ex-
plain how it happened. Did he let
some conviots leave upon mere verbal
order2 Did he release others himself,
or by request of some other person than
the Executive? Did he fail, as would
seem from their statements and from
the place and circumstances of their re-
appearance to be true, to provide them
with means of subsistence and of trans
portation to their usual places OF abode?
The matter may seem small to Mr.. Den.
mis-, but the public desire to know, as
they have right to know, how it was
that these Irregularities happened. In
the State OF Georgia, which hires out it's
700 convicts, crime is made to add to
ktnk b..