The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-09-25
GOVERNOR AND PARD0NS
RESOLVES ON A FIRMER POLICY IN
CONSIDERING PETITIONS.
Ripley County Lawlessness Sets Him
to Thinking on This Line-NO
Remission of Fines.

A chilly atmosphere has settled over the
pardon department at the Governors Of
flee and the frigid temperature produced
by the recent lawlessness in Ripley coun-
ty seems destined to prevail for long
time to come. Governor Mount is naturally
disposed to be sympathetic and charitable,
but his experience in dealing with con-
victs has thus far been SO disappointing
that he has resolved on firmer policy in
considering petitions and pleas for execu-
tive clemency.
There are about nine hundred applications
for pardon or parole now on file in the
Governors office, and a large majority Of
these have been examined since the begin
ming of the present administration last jan
uary yet appeals are no less persistent.
During the past ten days no less than three
petitions for pardon have been presented in
behalf of persons regularly tried and con-
vcted, but who have not yet been inside
the prison walls. This sort of unreasonable
persistency has severely tried the patience
of the Governor, and it is apparent that
he is resolute in his determination to dis
courage the idea that it is any part of the
duty or disposition of the executive to undo
what the courts have done. Il have given
careful attention to nearly all the cases
now pending" said the Governor yes
terday, land have acted on large ma
jority of applications L deem worthy.
Henceforth it will be my aim to consider
only such appeals as carry with them in
disputable merit. Since assuming the func-
or twenty-five convicts, but every one of
these now living , IS n under al all
mY b Of ths numbep
ly half are represented by consumptiVe
prisoners paroled from the State Prison at
have
since being released last July. l was con-
WINGED a. that time that the clemency thus
extended was humane and proper, and /
have no reason to change that opinion As
a general rule, however, l am opposed to
the free use of the pardoning power, ana
l am not disposed to overrule the Judgment
of courts and juries. 1t too frequently
happens that heavy penalties are imposed
with the vague understanding or expecta-
ton that the verdict will be- set aside by
executive action, and these efforts at cir
cumlocution and double dealing are de-
serving of the severest condemnation. A
great many people appear TO be labor under
the somewhat remarkable miSapprehension
that the Governor IS a judicial officer,
whereas his duties are purely and eXclu-
sively ministerial. The Constitution and the
statutes grant to every citizen exceedingly
liberal opportunities for defense Wheii called
to account by indictment or otherwise, and,
if the courts convict it is a natural pre-
sumption that the finding Is just ana That
there is no valid reason why it should be
reversed by executive authority. In other
words. evildoers and all others concerned
must make up their minds that court or
competent Jurisdiction, rather than the
Governors office, is the proper place TO
try and determine the guilt or Innocence
Of alleged Offenders That is the principle
by which / shall be governed and shall
remain firm in that determination because
I am convinced ii is a duty l owe not only
to society, but to myself as well.
The Governor was especially emphatic In
saying he did not propose to remit nnes,
except in the rarest OF instances and in
cases only where the justice and propriety
of such action were established beyond
peradventure.