The news & observer., 1896-12-29
FROM JUDGE TlMBERLAKE.
he CRIviCiSEs GovsRNcS CARR
FOR PARDoNlNo PRATT,
Judge Undertake Makes out His @'de
With Some Tart Structures
on the Executives


heretofore towards me warrants the be-
lief that the injustice which was done
by your account OF the trial. conviction,
sentence aud pardon of G. j. Pratt and
others was unintentional and that you
will take pleasure in giving place to this
statement. The account, as published,
is so improbable that j would hardly
deem il worth while to reply, but for the
fact that the official position of the Gov
ernor may give force and effect, even
to so improbable story. 1t is admitted
that the record showed trial, conviction,
sentence and an appeal to the Supreme
court therefrom. 1t is further admitted
that, pending the appeal reasonable bail
was allowed--only $500 in case Of Pratt
and $3.50 in. ease OF others-and that
neither one Of the defendants was inn
prisoned at the time the Governor
granted the pardon or had ever been,
under the sentence. / have never ex-
amined the records of the executive de-
partment but l venture to assert that
never before in the history Of this State,
when defendants are out on bail, has
pardon been granted, pending an appeal.
and before, even. as in this ease, the case
on appeal has been settled by the pre-
siding judge. / base this assertion on
c0mmonsenSe and reason. No one is un-
dergoing punishment. Hence no necessity
for immediate action. LIE the Supreme
court grants a new trial. the necessity
for the interference of the Governor does
not exist.
| go further and venture the assertion
that never before, in the history Of the
State, when the application for pardon,
as in this case, is based on error commit
ted by and misconduct on the part OF
the trial jury. bas a Governor granted
q pardon without advising with the Soil
citor who prosecuted, or the judge who
tried the case. l base this assertion on
my belief that never before has North
Carolina had n Governor whose partisan
bias had become so intense as to be will
ing TO make and have a record in his
office, rejecting on an officer of a co-or-
dinate branch of the government without
first giving such officer an opportunity to
defend himself. 1t will not do to answer
that the pardon was granted, not on
account of any finding Of misconduct, but
that it was on account OF error committed,
for in so doing, he would be constituting
himself the appellate court and ,usurping
its authority. l go further still, and as
IL
OF the State, whatever the grounds upon
which pardon is asked might have been,
unless the application was signed by one
or the other, has a Governor granted
pardon without first advising with either
the judge or solicitor, unless in case of
sickness, the case was an urgent one
and there is no such claim In the case un-
der consideration. / base this assertion
on information received by me from the
present private secretary of the present
Governor. Some time this year, / received
a letter from him asking me to call at
the executive Office the next time passed
through Raleigh. / did so. He wanted
information concerning an application
from citizen Of Yancey county to be
relieved of a fine imposed by Judge
Bryan for the violation of a restraining
order granted by me, and during the in
terview, he gave as a reason for troubling
me that ii was an invariabie rule of the
executive department to advise with the
trial judge and the judge who had any
connection with the case in any way be-
fore granting a pardon. The humblest
citizen Of North Carolina has right to
confront his accusers and to be present in
person and by COUNSEL if he should so de-
sire. In all civil actions before any
orders or judgments can be taken against
any citizen, service of summons must be
shown. Yet we see the Governor of
North Carolina, not only disregarding all
precedents- -pardoning men out on bail,
pending an appeal to Supreme court-dis-
regarding the rule hitherto universally
followed by himself; but we see him,
when a charge of misconduct is made
against one OF the judges of the State,
proceeding to determine the truth of
the charge, on evidence furnished by and
on behalf of the criminals themselves,
finding on such evidence the charge to be
true and leaving such record in his
office, without in any way, giving notice
to such judge OF what is going on, the
first notice to him being a newspaper
criticism, based on such action. And /
ask the fair, just men OF North Carolina,
Of all shades of political belief, their
opinion of such conduct on the part of
the highest officer of the State Is there
one who will not condemn it? If so, let
him speak out. 1t will not do for the
Governor TO answer that the proof offered
was Of such a character as that the
necessity of advising with the judge and
solicitor did not arise. The proof, what
ever its character, was furnished by and
Ol1 DGtlhiA VI lAtS SIlulllldIo LuGll4SGlf
and, if of such high character, it GER
tainly would have withstood the light
Of honest investigation. I demand of the
Governor of North Carolina to tell the
people Of the State whether or not, if
Democratic judge and solicitor had tried
the case under consideration, he would
have granted this pardon without first
advising with them. He will not dare
say, yes, for he well knew, il he did,
nobody would believe it. When I began
this article, it was my intention to give
n full history of the arrest, Of prosecution
and trial, conviction and pardon Of de-
PENDANTS, but find it viii make the state
ment too long. / will, therefore, give only
a few admitted facts and close. 1t was
admitted that no warrant was in the
hands OF the officer Pratt at the time
of the arrest and that the alleged offense
was not committed in his presence. 1t
was admitted that no warrant was ever
at any time thereafter issued for Neill
Skinner and that he was never brought
to trial on the charge against him. 1t
was admitted on the trial by defendant