New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1897-07-14
County Treasurer Schwertfeger:

me. When at liberty they had no mer.
/ cy; they were bandits by choice, and.
notwithstanding they we're we'll enough
educated to know better, they spared no
one. It was money or life with them
then, and see no reason why we should
be lenient with them now. The fact
that they have been we'll behaved should
not count in their favor as against the
interests of society. They couldn't have
well been otherwise. They were sentenced
for life, only because the law in their
case would not permit Of hanging. They
should therefore be compelled to serve
out that sentence as an example and
warning to others. d
Col. Bobleter: It is my opinion that
they have been punished enough. 4
would favor letting them out, providing
they were compelled to leave the state.
Chas. Sommer: They have done their
harm let them suffer for it.
Justice Brandt: No, sir; do not be-
lieve in a pardon. Parties who commit
such enormous crimes, should stand the
full measure of punishment. -.
! Hy. Keller: No, sir. The proper pun
ishment would have been to hang the
culprits at the time they were captured
and convicted.
Richard Pfeferle: I have sympathy
for the boys. They had big and gener-
GUS hearts and were not naturally crimi-
nal. We should not lose sight of the
circumstances that made them what
they were. If released they will never
do anyone any harm, and their conduct
as prisoners shows them to be at least,
well-mlnded men, fully legreteing the
deeds of their early years.
Capt. George: If left to me, I think
I would pardon them. They do not ap-
pear to NE to be dangerous characters and
am of the opinion that they have been
sufficiently punished. The law has been
indicated, and this particular case de-
monstrates that we can keep a man in
prison as long as we see fit. Crime, it
seems to me, is deferred, not so much by
the severity of the punishment, as by its
certainty.
Col. Baasen: am Tor pardoning them.
They have been well-behaved as prison
ers and we have right to expect that
they will be well-behaved as citizens en-
joying liberty. All their partners in
crime are free, and 1t would be but an
act of humanity to set them free, now
that they have been punished so long.
The object of imprisonment is to cor
rect and reform. Having served this
purpose, apparently, in the case of the
Youngers, we should give them their
liberty.
Judge Laudenschlager: I am most
emphatically opposed to their release.
They robbed and killed wilfully and
mallciously, and would never think of
signing petition to pardon them out.
Let them pay the full penalty for their
awful crime. r..
Chas. Stuebe: I would never think of
such thing. It would be all wrong to
pardon them.
Attorney Hagberg: see no good rea-
son why they should be pardoned. I'm
der the law at the time of their convic-
ton a life sentence was all that could
be given then, and they should now be
given the full benefit of it. ..a
Charles Wagner: While would not
place anything in the way of a pardon,
personally do not favor it, They took
advantage of the law to escape the gal
lows and should be content to pay a
mild penalty for their awful crimes.
| VIM. F. Setter: No, sir; others are
serving like sentences for less helnous
offenses and why shouldn't they.
/ F. w. Baarsch: Let them serve out
their sentence. :.s.. !. r.
DR.. Marden: I hope for pardon.
There have been many perpetrators of
equally vicious crimes, whose sentences
have been RENTED.
Tie following is reported from cross
roads justice court:
''Now, Jedge," said the witness, s.I'm
about ter tell the TRUTH
!. ''Do you mean ter tell me-" said the
Justice, 'that you've been lynn these
last two hoursg''
sJedge," replied the witness, 81 wuz
raised in yo' settlement an both OF us
has drinked outcn the same jug, but
TIM gwine ter tell you right now If you
49,