The record-union., 1892-03-18
THE EXECUTIVES REASONS.
Governor Markham Explains Why the
Petition Was Granted.

Petition Was Granted.
The following are the reasons given by
Governor Markham for committing Free
,man's sentence to life imprisonment:
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, On the I4th day OF March in
STINT q petition was filed in this Office by
Charles Freeman, who was convicted of muir
der in the first degree, in the Superior Court
OF Sacramento County, on the 3Oth day of
April. 1890, and sentenced on the 9th dav of
June, 1890, TO be hanged.
The case was thereafter appealed to the Su-
pTeme Court of this State, and on the 18th
Uay OF December 1881, that court rendered
its decision, affirming the Judgment OF the
Tower court.
on the 5th day of February, 1892. the Su-
perior Court liked the 18th day of March in
slant for carrying said Judgment into effect
Iy this petition 1 am asked to commute the
sentence TO one Of imprisonment in the State
Prison for life.
The supreme Court. in passing upon the
question of insuIdciency OF evidence 10 con-
Wet the defendant, after a careful review Of
all the testimony in the case. SAYS that il can
not he held as matter Of law that the Jury
was not warranted in concluding that the
guilt of the defendant was established beyond
Il reasonable doubt. But it further adds that
the case, as presented upon the record before
II, leaves room for grave doubts as to the
truth of the story told by Wilkes; and the
members OF that court, in letter addressed
To me, dated March l 1th instant, say:
The evidence against Freeman was such
that the supreme Court could not have iu-
&icially set aside the verdict without violating
al precedent and usurping power Never
ThelS SIS, the testimony was so peculiar and
the facts uFon which his conviction rested
were so unusual and apparently unnatural
that it would have been much more satis-
factory TO us II the punishment assigned by
the jury had been imprisonment instead Of
ueath-so that. il il should be discovered that
O. mistake had been made, there might be
some reparatiOn.
I'VE think, therefore, that the case. owing
10 its peculiar circumstances, is one IN which
the Govornor may well exercise executive
ciemency by committing the penalty to i'm
al. b. MCFARLAND,
''RALPH c. HARRISON
&C. Ii. GAROUTTE.
y. j. DEHAVEN,
''VAN II. PATERSON,
a. r. SHARPSTEIN.''
The Chief Justice of the supreme Court in a
letter addressed To me, dated March "a inst
says, among other things:
4 know nothing OF the case aside from what
Is disclosed by the record brought TO the Su-
preme Court, and can only say that strongly
felt the doubts which lexpressed in my opin-
ion, TO the truth OF the story told by the
principal witness for the prosecuuCn.'
The Judge of the superior Court, before
whom the case was tried, and who passed the
sentence OF death, III letter addressed TO me,
dated March 10Th. says among other things:
"1he comments o. the supreme Court, COM
ing nom an authoritative source. have, / am
satlSneu, disturbed public sentiment with
reference TO the case, and aroused distruSt
as 10 the correctness OF this verdict, and the
QuGStAOuf luSIelNFc, II seems 10 M, should
not be determined without consideration of
the eBe@t this TACT may have upon the future
administration OF criminal justice in this
State.
Your eXcellency is well aware of the diff
cutJles cally enc3Gntered by the courts in Sc
curing just NerdlctS in important criminal
cases, by reason ot tie many distract NJ in
1iuenceS brought to bear upon the minds of
Jurors, calculated 10 render them timid and
uncertain as to their duty. one Of the most
po;ent OF these, ID my Judgment, and always
seized upon by aStute counsel and repeatedlv
Gale TO the attention of jurors, is The fact
taat there have been instances. uufllrt{11aatelv
where persons have been unjustly eorlv lvicteC. of
ctinaes OF which they We're innocent. and +, lil,
Iaonot beliey This TO be such d case Il ,yorfd
be pointed out rs suchs aud I am OF the o,ir-
ION that by reason OF the criticism which haS
been passed upon it. a large Eart OF the cfrg3-
n,uu{tV has come to regard il xyitl1 SJ,ch
doubts that IL arouSes stroag feeling that
tie extreme penalty OF the law Should not 10
visited upon this defendant
Tire Juage further says, Tor reas sons oI,nfed.
that while satisfied that this man ilas.beef
pufItv. of a cruel ana unpToyoked murder ne
i,@als cons, ,rained 10 suggest the propriefv al
rommutang the sentence TO thai Of iTnpuison-
ment Tor life.
IT Is n wen known fact that the Jury were
uncovered. under the law 10 determine
whether the punishment upon q verdict Of
murder in the iist degree should be death or
Iapriso5 "a ut tol ilie