The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1898-01-28
SOUND VIEWS ION THE PARDON
ING BUSINESS

Every state has more or less COM
pha5ftS as to pardons no doubt,
whether made by ONE NAL as governor
OK a court of pardons composed of
three or more judges. TIN power re-
posed in one man, and he .Jne busy,
hurdehed chief executive, is too much
both as to labor and Influence. A man
Erlay be strong and true and clear
headed like a Vance, or bull headed
Hnd weak-minded and partisan, but he
will be heavily weighted if he must
consider the many cases THAT come to
him for executive consideration and
clembency. 1T is a we'll balanced man
fndaed who can plumb the middle
way, neither yielding to importunlate
pNeas for mercy nor s~urrendering to
popular clanor or party sympathy.
We all know how much of downright
sentimentality enters into the plea for
THE interference of the mighty one
man, clothed i'm his brief authority"
2 and how often governors have found
Git, almost impossible ito deny the i'm
portunity. Recently in Texas a case
OF appeal to the governor came up,
but after examining properly into the
merits of the case he refused to exer-
else the p~ardoning power invested in
him.. The crime was fearful and the
Facts indisputable. The ably con-
Quoted Houston Post says of the case
OF Eugene Burt:
when the courts have calmly re
viewed the facts ard h question on
the prisoners mforai responsibility,
and reached the conclusion that deatn
SHOULD be THE punishment, the endS
of justice should never be 't1warted
Dy the executive in grounds OF sym
pathy, or mere doubt as to Wheaher
sIfYe courts acted properly with tfEa
9sahts before them. THE executive Is
mot a court of review. The pardonlng
uaawer is lodged with the chief ofhcer
of the state to be exercised only
where newly discovered facts, or
ssoa1nd reasons for clemency that could
NOT be considered by the courts, can
-lEse urged in the criminals behalf.
That correctly states h case, we
s~4pprehend. The only just and right
,ozas exercise OF this anomalous power
rs SV1Gl II rs hdQ HA0ilA C4N~h
xSsw evidence and additional reasons
sym- executive Inference that could not
have appeared i'm the trial. n tine
court and the lawyers generally and
much OF the community unite IN ask
xrxy for executive interference and per-
S.apsclenency it is certainly in order
ff,r the governor to impartiany and
sYrorplehly review the case and act In
accordance with facts. 1T Is always
I'D gSa presumed that the court mas
srsryad a. right verdict in n case or a
condemned criminal unless it is made
tn anpsar otherwise Through the inter-
ference of the judge presiding, the
solicitor. jury. &c. Ut is patent to all
the jurias ais now constituted are
xy,aacln more apt to be ON h side OF
criminals and scoundrels than on the
side oil extreme severity in Furnishing
crime. The Post says:
saThe juries of tine country rarely err
against the prisoner. 1t is unfortu-
syately true that convictions for capt.
sas offenses are too ~infrequent, in view
eST fine startling number of such crimes.
Ard the governors of many states aid
I'm FMS loose administration OF Justice
by allowing their sympathies, or senti-
mental popular pressure. to cause
Tnesn too often to forget their stern
Sassfy to society. The executive or a
great state, of of a nation, nus be
strong enough ito appreciate the dis
eIncfion between the man and the offl-
Ger-tO divorce his official
from his personal impulses and pre-
objections.
The morbid enthusiastically of the day
chat makes dts way into the jury