The Morristown gazette. [volume] (Morristown, Tenn.) 1867-1920, 1883-06-13
ABUSE OF EXECUTIVE POWER.
We cnnr elseHhere. from the Nash.

editorial article under the caption
" Pardons by the Governor" and
commend it n the serious attention
OF our readers. The views express
ed are sound and the note OF warn
ing most timely. The closing SEN
fences are so good that, fearing our
friends, and especially Governor
Bate. will not have them sufficient
" impressed upon their minds by 8
single reading, we give them
double insertion, incorpora ing them
here :
Sentiment and the social standing OF
offenders should not move the Governor
10 such action. The rich and the poor,
the learned and the ignorant, should
alike be made to suffer. but if any dill
ference is to be made, lie; it be in behalf
of the poor and ignorant; the chance oil
escape from conviction is sufficiently in
favor of the rich and learned, without
the addition of executive clemency."
This matter OF executive inter
ference with the decisions OF our
courts in their criminal proceedings
is a growing evil all over the coun-
try, and we have watched its deyel-
opment and growth in our own State
with anxiety and alarm. Governor
Hawkins made himself somewhat
conspicuous in this regard; but
Governor Bate seems TO start out
with the purpose of eclipsing his
immedi. tie predecessor in office, and
from the list which is furnished by
the Banner, and the peculiar color
and flavor OF has pardons-being
mainly confined, as the reader will
observe, to gunpowder and whisky
we think he will do it with ease +!
But, seriously: this thing OF per-
hitting the Governors OF States TO
set aside the work of our judges and
iurics in their efforts TO suppress
crime and TO punish criminals,
ought to be put stop TO, not alone
in Tennessee out in every State OF
the Union. We can really see no
good reason why the several courts,
hioh and low. should not be as COM
pst-us to render fnal decisions IN
criminal - they are - render final
decisions in civil cases. And yet,
for an executive TO interfere and to
set aside the decision OF court and
Jury, or Of the Supreme Bench, in a
case OF the latter kind, would be de
nounced from Carterto Shelby SIS
gross usurpation Of power. In Prln-
ciple there is little or 10 difference,
even though the constitution of the
| State may give a color of right to
do il in the former class OF cases.
And if the growing evil-this pre-
mium offered to crime: this thing
Of executive pardons-cannot ne
reached otherwise, we think it would
pay a good profit to the Sta e, in the
end. 10 cali convention and SO
amend the constitution IS TO take
/ out of the hands OF the Governors
this dangerous and too oiteE abused
power of hardening convicts. The
peace and safety of every commun'
| itv is endangered when discredit is
cast upon the wisdom, justice and
incorruptibility of our criminal
courts, as is done 10y every exercise
Of the pardoning power up-n the
part OF the Governor of Il State, IN
less clearly warranted by some evil
dences Of innocence OF the crime
charged and for which the pardoned
we're convicted, that was not before
the Judge and jury at the time Of
rendering their decision. Even IN
such cases, it would be enough, we
think, for the executive to simply
have power to direct a new trial Of
such cases, still leaving the final de
cisiou where it ought to be, in the
hands of the judiciary. A Governor
Of a great State has enough bust
ness upon his hands, of a purely
political kind, TO occupy his mind
without being required to overhau
the proceedings OF criminal courts
aud give such attention TO the plesi
Of petitioners for pardons as would
be necessary to decide wisely anC
with prudence upon the merits o
. dement's of conviction for crime
] involving the honor and integrity o
judge and jury.