Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-01-14
u,,,. p,RpoxuNG POWER.

-, c,,o,Ina and virginia botn AZ
:" -. ",be hardening power Is SUI
Goo, ~ discussion. II has been ~. 90
=, ,,o Governor OF either sta'e .,,h
a,,,o hearings to all who ask 'n''"'
~ ,,,e,v OF getting clients OF ii'e"'
80 world have no time io' "'
- ,o,k Hence, in each state '"e'
,orr,ar demand for the crea"oi'
- . :, pardons. While the Cohsu'u-
ton Of virginia gives our hSe'u.'' oNe,e
colo mower to grant pardohs, ,,,u
~. - we suppose IT would W 'a"i''
-. a hoard created. whose guy
-, Va % investigate each appno''',"
"Ou'u .,,o Governor as to his duty III
the premises .,,. limited in it's
s,onc-is now done by the boa''
roctors OF the penitentiary' III inc N'.o,,or
~, oond,nonal pardons. Each piiS'"e
". hoe served one-half OF the uinS
Vs. -an,a,co and who has kept the Pr
"'9 NO. IN every respect" and VINO ~
tho opipion OF the board Is AZ -
for executive clemeney. may ~
mended by the board ro Of
n, course. the prison RECORDS are ~
nond 70 afford information as 10 INC "p
~,,oon.,s prison record; but 1t is not 81
-. eor the board to determine whether
the applicant is fit person ioi 80.
ENJOY The penitentiary oflc'als anu W
Governor well know that some Vi '"'
..ors, % the enemies Of society make eN-
IL. r,;soners. SO, the prison recoru
oo,rot he relied upon TO solve the que''
ton whether the applicant Is "A i. p'''
sor n he recommended for PARDON hei''
the hoard makes it a rule to write u '"'
.r,,, ,udcs upon the subject Of each ap
pheation. rtson re-
II the applicant has cream pi''O 49,,
cord and can get favorable "oiu -
from the trial Judge. and can sa'iSiy y"
ho.rd that he can get employment Il -
leased he is pretty suro 10 se'u''
,oo,a,s recommendation. Then II io'U
- 10, tho Governor to say whether coi'
> d,,ional pardon shall or shall not , ,59..o,
Ae,or awhile this system may hsn'
,he labors Of the Executive SUM- ~
+ -. co far. It has had the opposite q
, 49, Tho reason for that is simple an
o,,,ral rpon the passage of the Id" ie
L ,s.,,.a % conditional pardons, the irleno
of scores of prisoners went aou'
: work 70 SECURE the release OF 'hoS0
}. -, thev we're interested. The resu
= has heen that applications under the me-
Low have been fled by the Dozen
e Tho investigation that the board mas
Al make in these cases is tiresome' Ou' ~
h very dificult: but upon the Governor inc
8 falls nearly the same worry ana resP0'
n. sibilty as in other cases.
l. rho next General Assembly will be ca
IN "a mon TO amend the law in regard
n conditional pardons, so as to give |
d. legislative purpose freer scope anu
ut would then be well for it to take up u
nc ,,,bolo ouestion Of pardons. We enter'a
ed no Doubt as 10 the policy and proprle
ling the Governor some sort OF
lief. H.. 4.
Nv M all the duties OF our Executive L
sh &c the most responsible, disagreeapie'
rs borious. and unsatisfactory; out UNI
V" the present provisions of the state ~
ne stitution he cannot be wholly relieved
No them. The best that can be done Is
y" create an advisory board to DIVIDE "
~ him the responsibility and the work
az pight here we must add that In Nirgl
iss the pardoning power has nearly aiw'
49, been cautiously used. We doubt II III
49, other State executive clemency as II
ne has been exercised with more pruue
400 and good Judgment.