Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1877-04-11
ThE frEEman
MONTPELIER VT.
WEDNESDAY, APRIL II. 1877.
AT,egaI RanrieYe,


poning Phair's execution till Down
ing's story can be sifted, does him
credit. And we believe that he had g
good legal right to grant the reprieve, not
withstanding the arguments of the Rutland
Globe and some other papers to the con-
trary.
The constitution rs now printed pro-
vides that in cases of murder and treason
The governor shall have power only ito
grant reprieves, but not to pardon until
after the end of the next session of Assem-
bly," A careless reading would make
this a grant of power 10 reprieve at any
lime and to pardon after session OF the
assembly. Such construction has been
Int upon this clause for within the last
third of II century IL murderer has been
pardoned in this state.
But as long ago as 1910 Chief Justice
Williams, in delivering an opinion Qound
in Vol. ~, Vermont Reports in this coun-
;y in the case of one George Holmes, had
stated tie correct doctrine that the makers
of our constitution intended to guard jeal-
ously the course of justice from the inter-
ference of the executive and to keep the
pardonng power in capital cases in the
hands of the legislature, and that tho gov
ernor in cases of murder had no power TO
Oopf1op but Oplv tr rnnrinVn
In this connection IN article in the free
Press, published in 1874, upon the value
of a comma, is interesting. 1t was there
shown that after the word pardon, in the
above given extract from the constitution,
there should be a comma; there was one
placed there in the first publication of the
constitution in 1873 but in later editions it
has dropped out. Tho actual reading of
the constitution is then in accordance with
Chief Justice Williams construction and
is that the governor has in murder cases
only "power to grant reprieves, but not to
pardon, until after the end of the next
session of assembly"
The fifteenth article of " Part the First"
of our constitution, says that:
The power of suspending laws, or the
execution of laws, ought never 10 be eX
ercised but by the legislature, or by
authority derived from it, to be eXer-
" cised in such particular case rs this con-
stitution, or the legislature, shall provide
for"
The only provision made by the consti
tuition or laws of Vermont as to granting
reprieves in murder cases is the one we
have above quoted, which grants Striking
out the parenthetical clause) power to
grant reprieves until after the end of the
next session of assembly,"
So far we go with the Globe, and would
hold the executive of the state to a strict
construction of the law. But when it
comes to saying that " the next session of
assembly" intended by the constitution
was the one held last fall, we contend it
was not. The next session meant by the
constitution is, by law and common sense,
the session following the day set, by the
court in the sentence, for the execution of
the criminal, A reprieve for Phair before
April 9th 1877, the day on which he was to
have been hung, would have been nonsen-
steal. The day named in sentence is the
day meant by the constitution us the
starting point of reckoning time, other
wise the power granted amounts to moth
ing.
From 1873 to 1912 judge could sem
tence man convicted Of murder to be
hung on any day, however near, he chose.
So the only chance convict could have
to apply to the pardoning power (the leg
islature) might depend on reprieve
granted by the governor,
From 1912 to 1870 the law was so a
session of the legislature must intervene
between conviction and hanging, 1t was
step forward in securing 10 n convict
chance to apply to the pardoning power,
But the law of 1912 tried to take away
no right OF reprleve. it merely postponed
execution TO at least one year from date of
sentence. 1t did take away from the goy-
ernor the power preventing, by refusing
reprieve, convict from making IN APP
plication to the pardonng power.
In 1870 biennial sessions began, but the
law of 1912 was not changed, and from
1870 to 1872 the constitutional provision
was all that, in certain cases, would have
given convict chance to apply to the
legislature. In 1872 law was passed
which places execution at least two years
after sentence, and again makes certain
session between sentence and hanging.
But the Legislature can take away no
constitutional right Of the executive; he
can now as before reprieve until after the
end OF the next session of the assembly.
A reprieve is merely the temporary sus-
pension of the execution of sentence; it
has no strength no life, no reason for be-
ing, till that execution is imminent; then
it wards off that execution-and in this
state may do so for any length of time in
cluded between the moment for execution
and the end of the next session of the
legislature.