The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1875-12-02
Abuse Of the Pardoninq Power.

Abuse of the Pardoning Power.
Dublin J. Walker, the present Senator
from Chester County, was recently con-
victed of fraudulently issuing q pay GER
tifcate while School Commissioner of
that County some years ago. Upon that
conviction he was sentenced by Judge
Mackey to imprisonment in the Peniten-
tiary for one year, and upon the recon-
mendation of the Judge and the jury
Gov. Chamberlain granted commuta-
ton Of sentence to imprisonment in
the county jail. This was, however, not
enough to satisfy the desires of the Sena-
torial gentleman, and he made his appi-
cation for pardon on the ground of after
discovered circumstances. This applica-
ton was seconded by Judge Mackey,
whose chance for reelection as Judge is
said TO depend upon Walker being re-
stored to his seat in the State Senate. The
newly discovered circumstances are certi-
fed to byB g.. Yocum, Treasurer of Ches-
ter county, and f. B. Lloyd, School Com
missioner. It is remarkable that facts
justiffying an acquittal should have been
left out when the parties who know them
were witnesses in the case. Isit possible
that these witnesses were not questioned
upon the. whole. case in such a manner as
to elicit all the facts? The part borne
in the case by these witnesses is, to speak
mildly, very remarkable. In recon-;
mending the pardon Judge Mackey says:
saThe above stated acts (in.the afida-
Wits of Yoeum and Lloyd would have
been material evidence in Walkers favor
onghis trial, especially as / charged the
Jury that "the mere fact of signing q
teachers pay certificate as School Com
missioner, after he had TOR q considerable
time ceased. to be School Commissioners,
was badge of fraud, and imposed on the
defendant the burden of proving beyond
a reasonable doubt that he acted in good,
faith in so signing" '1n my Judgment
Judge Mackey continues, eff these facts
had been disclosed on the trial, the jury
would not have rendered q verdict of
guilty, nor should have regarded the
whole evidence as warranting such
verdict. would most certainly have
ordered new trial, of4nsy o,on notion,
had I been informed of these facts before,
the sentence was pronounced i
In addition to this nephew Of Judge.
Macksy, who is scting Solicitor, recon-
mended the pardon, and Messrs. 8. J.
Couch, a brother-in-law of Mackey's, to-
gether with W. A. Walker and Charles
S. Brice, members of tho Chester bar,
say: ~.
sIn view of the afidavits of B. G..
Yocum and F. B. Lloyd, which raise the
reasonable presumption that Dublin
Walker and Henry Blake signed the cer-
tifcate which they were convicted for
issuing under the belief that they had the
authority to sign it we respectfully solicit
their pardon upon the legal grounds
therein set forth" !,
Upon this the Governor pardoned,
Walker. The fact that a presiding Judge
would have granted new trial is not
suficientto warrant a Governor in par
doning q criminal, neither is the recon-
mendation to pardon upon legal
grounds entitled to any weight, for the
Governor could only pardon upon equi,
table considerations. The pardoning
power will be dangerous and oppressive
whenever it is exercised to satisfy legal
technicalities. But the simple fact is
that the Mackey family wanted him par
doned to meet their political necessities,
and the Governor has made himself the
willing tool to accomplish their purposes.
There was no sound reason for the par
don, and the only conclusion We can
reach is that there is no possibility Of
Furnishing a politician in this State, for
between Judges, skilled in the appica-
ton of the writ Of ha6eas corpus, and a.
Governor, who is ready to commute or
pardon felons who are1 influential when
ever a few designing men recommend,
they are all sure to escape the just penalty
of their crime.