Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1897-04-16
It's Gravity Should Forefend.

III tin matter 60, Recommendations for
.Accutly" cl"ncucv. ana ha- instituted
sn,:l': board. cum>.>t.u. g: the Judge
h.ior, whum conviction WAS had and
thu Presenting Attorney III the case,
who>, recommendation. it j. intimat-
cd. will immediately cause tho" milk
oi human kindness" To- pcrmcatr the
executive veins.
In the matter al VIM. Carey, OF
King county, who murdered his
kl""clman, Il couple ui years ago. and
hc!ng found guilty in the first degree
in Judge lIumc,' court WAS duly SEN
fenced to death. the Judge, acting
upon the executive requirement, wrote
4 column letter To- the Governor and
the FL, in which he gave many rca-
sons why he considered the executive
requirement unjust and unreasonable,
but ends his letter with the injunc-
ton, " Let him live"
This does not, however, suit the
Governor. The Judges letter does not
admit that the trial was either unfair
or impartial; that no "mistakc was
made nor too heavy i sentence was i'm
posed" and he writes in the following
terms for more explicit declaration:
18th inst is before me. 1t is the bust
ness OF the court and jures to hear and
decide cases. Ii 4 mistake is made or
too heavy sentence is imposed, surely
no persons are better qualified to Judge
OF advisabilitv of the infiiction of such
excessive penalties than the presiding
judge and prosecuting attorney. Upon
receipt OF a request from you, signed
also by the attorney prosecuting the
case, the sentence of William Carey will
be committed to imprisonment for life.
Yours truly,
"JOHN X. ROGERS"
Whether Judge Humes will revise
his letter and make it conform to eX-
ecutlve requirements, or not, remains
to be seen, and even if the response is
satisfactory, it will be observed that
the life of Carey will tremble in the
balance until the public prosecutor is
likewise subjected to categorical ex-
animation.
In this connection, we reproduce Il
letter of Mr.. Jenkins, q member of the
Board of Pardons, to the Governor, in
which the fact is shown that the ex-
ecutive could not have had official
knowledge that a majority of the board
entertained conscientious scruples
against capital punishment, and for
himself declares that no matter what
his private opinion might be on that
matter, he had based his recommenda-
ton for clemency upon public opinion;
"earnest appeals from earnest hearts"
and after careful investigation into
the merits of the petitions in ques-
ton"
Unless there may be occasional in
stances in which Natures handiwork
is perfect in moulding human capa-
bilities, the average thinker can sec
no good reason why the details of off,
cial duty, under free government,
should not be divided. If anybody is
to revise, amend or reject the work of
Others, there seems to be no necessity
for complicated machinery when q
single wheel turned by single crank
would do the work as we'll and pro-
duce the same unvarying results. The
theory of our government is, however,
based upon divided responsibility. We
have three branches to constitute a
harmonious whole-the executive, the
legislative and the judicial-and it is
expected that they operate in har-
mony, neither trenching upon the
prerogatives of the other, no matter
how much individual judgment may
differ with any outlined policy.
1t seems to us that the Board of
Pardons would not have been created
had it not the purpose to endow it with
certain discretionary duties to perform,
and after they were done, the pardon
should follow purely as u ministerial
act. But then, we live in an age of
surprises. Teachers spring up by the
roadside. 1t is the unexpected which
continually happens, and we can
only hope that Futurity may have
something in store that may be more
pleasing if not less surprising.
But here is Mr.. Jenkins letter:
TO Ills EXCELLENCy, THE GOVERNOR:
Sir-Replying to your communica.
ton to the board OF pardons, in which
you refuse to act upon the recommended
tons OF the board, permit me, as an in
dividual member Of that board, to say to
you, Sir, that your premises are wrongly
predicated in assuming that nv recon-
mendatiOns, in either the Straub or the
Carey case, were based upon any con-
victiOns that l may have possessed
touching that infamous relic of barbarism
technically termed capital punishment,
but rather was based upon the merits of
the question at issue, as evidenced by
the vast volume of earnest appeals from
earnest hearts; further, that nv con-
illusions were the result of careful and
earnest investigation into the merits of
the petitions in question.
"When human life is at stake, do
not feel that any decision or conclu-
sions shall rest upon erroneous premises
or assumptions SO far as l am individu-
ally concerned, and must therefore ask
that You consider the recommendations
of the board, so far as am individually
concerned as a member thereof, as based
upon conclusions Of justice and not
upon any conscientious convictions that
might hold antagonistic to the prin-
ciples of capital punishment.
Feeling as / do that in the execu-
ton of the death sentence II, Ito aasos