The prison mirror. [volume] (Stillwater, Minn.) 1887-1894, 1889-01-17
The Durant Bill.

into the senate in reference to the
granting of pardOns. as follows:
Whenever a criminal is sentence to the states
prison for term of five years longer, the
Judge before whom he was tried shall file a state
ment Of the case with the clerk of the court, who
in turn shall send it to the governor. In case of
application for the pardon of the prisoner, a
copy of this statement must be served on the
county attorney of the county from which the
prisoner was sentenced together with notice Of
the application for pardon. The prison inspectors
will examine into all the facts and the county at
torney may appear before them and oppose the
granting Of pardon if he considers it his duty to
do so. No report recommending pardon can be
returned by the PRISON inspectors unless it is en-
dorsed by the trial judge and two-thirds of the
members Of the jury.
The thought in connection with the above
is. whether the Senator holds sentence
Of less than five years as too trivial to merit
attention, or should have fewer restrictions
placed in the way of its mitigation regard
less of the style of character under sentence,
than if it read five, ten or twenty years.
The poll of any prison will show. think.
the unwisdom of classification based on
length of sentence. whether it is to affect
the standing of the man while in prison;
the steps necessary to be taken to get out,
or the tone and security of the outside
world. The statement to be made by the
Judge would be fair measure if it covered
all prison sentences. But when the judge
has discharged this duty. right here
his relations to, and opinions in, the case
should cease to have more weight than the
opinions and interests of any other equally
well-nfOrmed and honest man. The same
can be said as to the county attorney. The
county attorney usually says the hardest
things he can of the defendant in open
court. Is it to be assumed then, that an
honest, disinterested man hearing it all.
cannot form as fair and just an opinion as he?
Is an honest man. loyal to every real inter
est of the state, likely to depart further
from justice on the side of humanity, than
the attorney is to lose sight of it Oh the side
of severity when the attorneys official rep
utatiOn depends on his ability to convict
impriSOn or hang every creature Indicted?
The conditions governing the report of the
Inspectors, if followed to the letter. would
work injustice in many cases. After five
or more years the judge might be dead the
jury scattered beyond the reacn OF tne prlS-
oner who is without friends or means. Yet
five gentlemen. selected for their intelli
gence, honesty and loyalty to the interests
Of the state, would be stopped from max
ing any recommendations in the case, how
ever well satisfied they might be that the
applicant deserved some consideration, by
the veto of the judge, county attorney, or
minority of the jury. whose duty to the
state ended in the conviction of the crimi
nal. Why! Five of the best men in the
state could be handicapped and rendered
pOwerlesS to do what they felt to be right by
five of the narrOwest and most ignorant
men on the jury? That the average jury
man is not Solomon. the challenges al
lowed and the combined opinions of the
press. testify. Where will you find malice
nursed and fondled if not by the ignorant?
Yet the above measure bids ignorance rule?
X. Y. u.