Kansas City journal. [volume] (Kansas City, Mo.) 1897-1928, 1898-01-04
CRITICISMS OF THE PRESIDENT
WITHOUT GOOD GROUNDS.
ARE EVIDENCE OF. IGNORANCE
M'KINLEY IS FAR LESS LENIENT
THAN CLEVELAND WAS.
MisapprehensiOn Due to the Fact
That Latter's PardOns Were Part
Of Star Chamber Proceedings
Which Characterized His
Administration.

in the newspapers because of his use of the
pardoning power, and comparisons are made
between his record and that of his prede-
cessor in this respect by people who are
evidently ignorant of the facts.
Reference Is made particularly to the par
don of ban wreckers and people who have
been convicted Of embezzlement and other
violations of the national bank act. The
records of the attorney generals office. how
ever, show that President Mckinley has
been less lenient toward men who have
been convicted of such offenses than was
President Cleveland, and that the number
of pardOns granted during the ten months
of his administrator thus far is smaller
than for the corresponding period for sew
eral years in the past.
The misrepresentation on this subject Is
largely due to the fact that the transac-
lions of the present administration are open
to public scrutiny. while those OF the last
administration were not. Every act and
event of Importance at the White House
or in any of the executive departments is
now promptly reported by the Associated
Press. Every cabinet officer and even the
president himself is easily accessible to
newspaper correspondents in search of in
formation, while under the Cleveland adj
ministration it was impossible to reach
the president and the members Of his cab
met sat behind locked doors. 1t could not
have been more difficult to reach them If
they had been Oriental p%otentates, and after
several months of experience busy men
abandoned the attempt. AT the White
House, Mr.. Thurber, the presidents sec
rotary, seemed to consider it his duty to
defy, deny and deceive the press. Now,
Mr.. Porter has Instructions from the pres
ident to give to the public all
except such as should properly be withheld.
The pardoning power is invested in the
president by the constitution in order that
persons who have suffered Injustice in the
courts may be relieved, and he is required
to exercise it just as an upper court of
law is required to hear an appeal. He must
grant or deny applications as they are pre-
scented to him upon the evidence submit
ted. 1t is not a matter of sympathy. but
of justice and law. The president has no
right to refuse to consider an application
for a pardon. He has no right to deny a
pardon when the application is sustained
by competent evidence any more than the
judge in a court can deny justice to a cit
izen who follows the regular course of pro-
cedure. When an application is filed at the
office of the attorney general it Is usually
accompanied by testimony showing why a
pardon should be granted. The application
and the testimony are usually referred to
the district attorney who tried the case and
the judge who passed sentence. and the
president depends more upon their adj
vice than upon any other source of infor-
nation. If they recommend a pardon. 1t Is
usually granted; if they advise against it.
1t is always refused. President Mckinley
depends more upon that sort Of advice than
upon any other While he is a man of strong
sympathies. and is naturally more or less
affected by public sentiment and the cir
cumstances surrounding the case. he has
never granted a pardon that has been OBJ
jected to by the judge and prosecuting at
torney.
During the ten months or so that he has
been in the White House President Mckin-
ley has granted ninety-seven pardons.
Twenty-three were combinations, eleven
restored the rights of citizenship to persons
who had been convicted of crime and had
lieved convicts from the further operations
of the sentence of the court. During the
corresponding ten months previous Presi-
dent Cleveland granted 220 pardons, of
restorations to citizenship and eighty-five
revoked the sentences of courts.
During the period named President Cleve-
land interposed in behalf of nineteen per-
bank wrecking and other violations of the
national banking" laws. President Mckinley
has interpOsed in fourteen such cases, three
times to restore the civil rights of persons
who had served their sentences. and twice
where the Judges who pronounced sentences
declared in open court that in their judg-
ment the penalty was too severe and volun-
teered to intercede with the executive. The
following tabular statement will show a
comparison of the exercise of the pardoning
power by President Cleveland and Presi-
dent Mckinley during the periods named
above: