The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1893-02-16

|
would be inexpensive to railroad com
panies and would obviate all danger OF
killing or wounding such large NUN
Der of railroad employees.
-------------
THE ADVLSORY PARDON BOARb.
1t is hardly worth while to say That
Mr.. Turner's bill providing for q
board of pardons with such pienary
mowers will not be entertained with
any favor by the Legislature. 1t is
question whether Or not Mr.. Turner II
in earnest or is perpetratipg huge
Joke upon the proposition pending for
the establishment ofan advisory board
of pardons.
1t is a difficult matter to take away
the privilege of suffrage when o-ce
conferred upon the people, and they
prefer TO elect their own district
Judges and attorneys. 1t was long
| liz hit in a number of states to take the
appointment of the judiciary away
from the governor aud make it cleo
tive by the people. When the new
constitution OF l848 was presented to
the people of Kentucky containing a
provision for all elective judiciary it
was opposed with vigOr and ability by
number of the leading men OF
the state, among it's opponenents
was the celebrated orator, ThOs F.
Marshall. He said that he had rather
be "a cat in hell without claws" than
an attorney for poor man before AZ
elected judge while the party on the
other side was q man of wealth and
influence. Notwithstanding opposi-
ton the constitution containing the
Ell ective judiciary clause was adopted
by large majority and it has become
too fixed principle in the body pol
itic TO he eradicated.
1t may be that Mr.. Tuner by pre-
5enting such radical bill means to
kill the measure entirely, but he will
not succeed, An advisory board OF
pardOns is needed more in behalf OF
the criminals than to relieve the gov
ernor of the work, although that is a
strong consideration in its behalf.
Punishment is administered for the
purpose of reforming the criminal
the moment that is accom-
plished Justice demands his
pardon and release. The
governor Of state cannot give sut1i-
CT mt time for the investigation of
every case that it demands. He
either has to neglect that or some
other important duties. The modified
form of an advisory board of pardons
asked by the governor would bring
into the field of prison reform men
whose character would give assur-
ance that every case would be fully
Investigated and other prison reforms
suggested by that board, for it is pre-
sumed that the governor would APP
point men members of this board who
would devote their best ability to the
criminal classes, suggest special modi-
fications of punishment, correct abuses
and inaugurate high standard of re-
formatory institutions out of our
prisons.
AS a humane and highly civilized
people, we are paying too little atten-
ton TO Convicts in state prisons.
When we convict them and send
them to the penitentiary we are
satisfied to know that they are
treated with moderate kindness and
made as comfortable as they ought to
be under the circumstances. We owe
them as human beings higher duty,
Christian duties which we dare not
neglect. There are many mOdifica-
tons of unnecessary severity that
such board would point out, and
many prison reforms they would in
tluence action upon by the legislature
that would advance US as II state in So
cial rank, as mindful of the duties we
owe to every human being in the state'
be he convict or not.
TEXAS has tried state intervention
i 1 ~