The record-union., 1891-12-22
EXECUTIVE CLEMENCT.
It is Exercised in the Cases of Three
ConvictS.
H. c. Close and John Dunno Pardoned
and James T. Bustard's Sem
tence COMMITTED.

sentence. In the case of H. C. Close he
says:
ION the 18th day of December, 1891, the |
Board of Prison Directors transmitted to !
me its recommendation for the pardon OF /
ID. Z. Close, who was sent from san Fran
cisco for five years for the crime OF |
forgery. He was at that time q years OF /
age, and by occupation civil engineer. |
The grounds then furnished by the board |
Tor Executive clemency were as follows: /
He is in poor health, being afflicted !
with some pulmonary trouble, and longer /
confinement may result very disastrously /
10 him. He has been engaged for several /
years in surveying and engineering work !
On the Pacific Coast, and many persons |
oi influence and prominence speak well |
Ot his work and his former straighttOr- /
ward career. We are Of the opinion EX-
ecutive clemency Will not be unworthiiy /
bestowed upon this young man, and that /
II released he will live an honorable and /
industrious life.'
This recommendation was furnished |
prior to the establishment of the rules |
which were submitted TO the board by /
ne IN November last. In consequence |
thereof, / caused the papers to be again
referred to the board under the new
regulations, and on the 10th day Of De-
cember, the board returned TO me the
papers with the statement that it was
still Of the opinion that the pardon should /
De granted upon substantially the same
grounds. Therefore, in accordance with |
che recommendation Of the board, and ia
addition thereto the assurances that he /
viii return TO his parents in New York |
that he is fully aware Of the crime COM
Inltted and thoroughly repentent, and
that he will hereafter lead an honorable
lie, have concluded to grant the pardon
rs requested
PARDON TO JOHN DUNNE.
In granting a pardon to John Dunno
the Governor says: The facts as pre-
sented to me III this case are as follows:
John Dunno, now confined at San Quen-
TN, was convicted in SiskivOu County in
October, 1887, and sentenced to fifteen
years for the murder of Jack Parsons.
It appears that Dunno and Parsons had
ulhculty about a mining claim, which
was IN the possession of Dunno, on or
near the klamath River, in said county !
Dunno had built a cabin and was in
possession of the property. Parsons, on
Inc day of the shooting, attempted to land |
raft of lumber on the claim, but failed
10 do so. Hepicked Gp his gun and went
down the road toward the cabin, near
which Dunno was located. Dunno then
vent to the cabin and stood in the door
way, and as Parsons approached within
about forty feet OF the cabin he was shot
by Dunno in the wrist During the diff
Guilty Parsons fired one shot at Dunno
and made two futile attempts to shoot
him. About two weeks after the shoot
ing Parsons died. The Judge who tried
the case says:
''There is some conflict in the testi-
nony as to whether Parsons came TO his
death from gunshot at the hands of
Dunno or whether his death was occa-
stoned by pneumonia contracted by ex-
posure after he received the wound, and
not depending on the shot by said Dunno
lie further states that Parsons had for
several years dominated over Dunno to
such an extent as 10 DrnVaut D1nna from,
applying to the law and having Parsons
bound over to keep the peace, for fear
PARSONS would kill him, Parsons being a
violent and vindictiYe man. The Judge
and District Attorney both recommend
The pardon on these grounds. The petit
ton is also signed by the jurors who tried
the case.
Hon. R. II. Campbell, Senator from
the Twenty ninth District says: Par
sons was known in the community as
Bloody Jack, and Dunno was always
known as an honest and peaceable man.
After the trial and conviction the
courts determined that Dunno at the
time OF the shooting, was IN fact the right
1ul owner OF the claim and entitled to ex-
elusive possession, as appears by the
statement of the District Attorney. This
case was by me submitted to the Board of
Prison Directors, with all the papers and
statements in the possession of this Office.
with no recommendation, but with the
sideration.
''On the 10th day of December, 1891. the
board forwarded TO me its decision, which
is as follows: The board, after full con-
slderation, also hearing the prisoners
statement, on motion of Director De Pue,
unanimously recommend his pardon
on the following grounds: That the
evidence IN the case cause grave doubts
IS to whether the deceased died from
gunshot wound or from pneumonia con-
tracted by exposure. The deceased was
known III the community where he lived
IS a very dangerous man, and was en-
CeaVorlng by armed force to take posses
sion of land belonging to Dunno.
The petition for his release is also
signed by the jurors, and the Judge and
the District Attorney both recommend
his pardon. His conduct while in prison
las been exceptionally good
Il fully concur in the opinion rendered
Ly the board, and pardon will be granted
accordingly"
THE CASE OF JAMES T. BUsTARD.
James Z. Bustard was convicted an
san Benito County for the crime of burg
larry, December 3, 1889, to serve a sentence
Of twelve years. The facts as presented
10 me are, briefly, as follows: He was
about l6 years old, but fell in with an old
criminal, and together they entered a
store in Hollister at night and were
caught in the back yard of the premises
with a few cigars. He was not of the
criminal class, neither had he lived such
g life As boy should lead up to that time.
Judge Breen, who sentenced him, saws in
lis letter recommending his pardon: I
take the liberty of again calling your at
tention to the facts stated in my former
letter, and respectfully submit that in
lew of the youth OF the prisoner, his
Clt-repeated assurances of reformation
and the character Of the ofTense, he has
low been reasonably and sufficiently
punished, or viii have been when he shall
lave served two years imprisonment
When the sentence was imposed, / gave
the young man TO understand that if his
character should prove meritorious while
ia prison, | would not be ayerse sto Join
ing in a petition for Executive clemency.
realize the force and business of the crit
icism made by many of the Governors OF
the State, and possibly by yourself, as to
the effect of the practice Of shifting the re-
sponsibillty of granting pardons from the
Judges of the courts to the Executive. |
know that ought MOTTO be commended, but
am now convinced that the sentence in
tae case was unduly severe, and l feel
constrained to ask for the young man
whatever clemency, if any, the circum-
stances may warrant
''All of the papers pertaining to this case
--~--~~--~-~~~-~~~~~-~~