The Lake Charles echo. [volume] (Lake Charles, Parish of Calcasieu, La.) 1876-1898, 1894-01-05
rARD0EMG CRIMINALS.


recommending the pardon of certain person
lstelyT Answer, s,yes.D Query, Nov tell
me why yea did so--pleaee give year f6aeo1s
fer demanding the pardon Of a man who sgas
fairly tried by q Jury 81 hispeete, anc found
guiity Of taking OF attempting 70 sake the
life Of n fellow man, and duly sentenced by
the court What entities this mSn 10 such
aistinctionFn Answer: RIO be candid did
not know what ] was signing; my gaad
nelghbor presented the petition saying he
wanted me to Bign II, and ! did so. The
only thought at the time was the petition
was enc addressed TO the Il. x. Co. ssking
them 10 erect q stock pen.n And still an
other ridiculous and characteristic occuranee
was revealed through an official by one
nHighbOr 10 smother asking for his reasons
for signing 3 petition for pardon. The
infeFrogated party said; ssANeil, / was told
the committing judge, the jury. and nearly
everybody else had tigned IL, sol thought ]
wonld too, never thought / was assuming
any personal responsibility IN the premises,
nor did the results connected herewith ever
enter my mind Now these two instances
serve 70 illustrate the levity, and the
th0ughtlessness, which chaTaeterize the
actions Of many many men In dealing with
petitions these two men who acted 50
thoughtleskly, are men who have few intel
leetual EuperiOEs IN Cur midst, besides they are
IN favor q the execution Of the law, and yet
lent their signatures to petition asking the
pardon ota man whom they afterwards aa-
mitted was not entitled toa pardon. What
food for reelection! People by the score
sEking TO have sentences rsI1itted. and some
times, sentences Of men whose hands are
ree1ing with the crimson blood OF an molten
eiRe teliowman. Yes II mag safely be said
that hundreds Of men are thoughtiessly lend
leg their influence to sWay the pardoning
boafd tn the suspension of the operation OF
HE law without thinking for one moment of
81
are setting. or of what might be the result Of
their action,
The people are the power behind the
throne, and individually we are Bersonally
responsible and to blame for any laxity that
may occur In the administration OF law, when
vs., Whom reason, Mlth9nt production Of
any new source Of Justification Yield 10 syfB-
pathetic appeals and allow ourselves TO be
made instruments to ELECT the release of any
criminal, There should be no pnrtiality
shown 10 any yi0lators Of the law, aud there
can be but one result. or one tendency Of these
Wholesale appeals 30 executive elemeDeY,
ard that tendency is to increase crime, and
10 lessen the respect which our people have.
or should have. for the laws OF the state. To
the laws OF our state and their faithfnl eNeeu-
tion we are indebted for all that we enjoy
Tor security for protection, for immunity from
insult and assault
The laws OF orr state are onr only STAY and
safeguard and our shield from danger; they
are the fOrtFees which Is erected around and
protects our homes, our wives our children,
our honor, our lives and our liberty.
Shoald We then q X to have them sus-
pended set aside or Stipulated by sympathy
or stupid sentimeRtaiityg Nay, let he who
must and wall violate the law enjoy the
fullest fruits Of his folly aud crime under the
laN.
We publish the above article from the
Lake Charles Press Of last week, on the
subject Of pardons and petitions for par
dons. The article is certainly well
timeed, as there is such a growing ten
deney among the people to exert them
selves unduly in favor Of The yioIators Of
the law. This question deserves seonsid-
GRAFTON from more than one standpoint.
First, The riglftof petition is regarded
in this country as sacred, inaIienaDle,
aIli inyiolable right, which cannot be
denied or refused Now, if emergency
should arise and We should have occasion
to petition either the legislative, judicial
or executive branches Of the government
Ia q really nerit0ri0as case, in what light
would we be regarded under existing cir
eumstaneesl How would the department
petitioned proceed TO ascertain whether
Or NOT the petitioners wererealIy in earn
est in face Of the fact that p0ssiblynine
tenths Of the people-tO whom petitions
are presented sign them without thought
Or examination, thus annuling OF. render
ing ineffective or unavailable, this ines
timable right reserved to ourselves, the
right uf petition.
Another Objectionable view Of this
Petitioning aud pardoning business, is
presented to ms. The Laws of our state
governing the trial Of criminals are tine
tured with mercy, and Jealous care Of the
criminals interest, and when he is ar
Eaigned for trial the great mantle Of ips-
tiee and ilnRarsiality is thrown aropld
him our courts aIe mercier and Just
almost to d fault, aud are careful to see
thai all the e1tenuating circumstances
connected with his crime are upaolded
and presented to the jury. Now, il after
all this fostering care has been thrown
around q man be should be convicted and
sent TO the peuiLentiaTy, Tor q given term,
on what can we base a plea for bis restor-
ationto liberty aud ali the elaoluments
OF life ? Certainly mot on the history Of
Cain, who slew his brother Abel.
still another view Of this matter, aud
that Is, that IL most cases where 1aen are
sentenced for either murder or man