The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1899-07-11
NO PARDON
FOR COOPER
But Mr.. Vandegrift Says
He Will Not Lose
His Citizenship.

The friends Of Colonel 4. T. Cooper,
who is in the Trenton Penitontiary for
conspiring with William N. Boggs to alb
straot and misspply the funds of tho First
National Bank Of Dover, have about
abandoned hope Of securing his pardon, as
had been expected. The papers were
filed some time ago, but 1t has been
learned by Former Congressman l.. Irv-
ing Handy that letter has been sent to
Cooper telling him that under the rules Of
the Department Of Justice concerning
pardons the papers will not reach the
President.
The reason given Is that 1t Is the rule
not to send such papers to the President
unless the application is approved by
either the judge or the District Attorney
who tried the case. Both Judge Il. q.
Bradford and District Attorney Lewis C.
Vandegrift, who was in office at the time
OF the trial, refused to approve the appli-
cation, 1t Is stated, and thus the matter
ends. The>news was broken to Cooper by
MIR. Handy, and tho prisoner was greatly
disappointed. His term will expire on
Angus; rs next.
He did not care for serving the time, but
desired to be pardonad SO that he might re-
tain his citizenship The friends Of Cooper
will now try to find some other way to get
the application before the President, but
in view Of the standing rule Of the Depart-
ment Of Justice it IL not seen how it will
be accomplished, and 1t lie likely that
Cooper will not secure the pardon. The
petition for pardon was signed by large
number of prominent citizens and officials
In this and other States, and the friends Of
the prisoner felt sure of success.
While there is difference of opinion as
to whether Cooper will lose his citizenship
the difference is due to a failure to study
the case. There Ia no doubt in the mi nds
OF the Federal court officials here Of Coop
er having right to vote when he ret urns
to this state.
As stated, former District Attorney
Vandegrift informed the prisoner. in a
letter Sent him, refusing to recommend
the pardon, that he would not bs disfran-
chised.
Mr.. Vandegrift expressed such an
opinion only after carefully studying the
case In this view he is supported by
recent decision of the Circuit Court Of
Appeals in Philadelphia. The decision
was given by Judge Bradford of this city.
Only prisoners convicted of an Infamous
crime or felony are disfranchised under
the laws, and Cooper's offense was not a
felony. and that the prisoner would not lose
his citizenship. Many who signed the Pc
tition for the pardon of Cooper did so be-
cause they desired him returned to citizen
ship.
Cooper was convicted under sec ion &, 440
of tho revised statutes Of conspiracy with
William N. Boggs.
The decision, which bears on the case,
was delivered by Judge Bradford in the
Circuit Court Of Appeals In Philadelphia
-oa. March 10 of this year. The case Of
Kerkowitz vs.. the United States. The
plaintiff sought to have case against him
dismissed on the ground that he had once
been acquitted on the same charge in the
court.
The charge was conspiracy. While the
right of the plaintiff to vote was not
brought up, the question of conspiracy
was considered In connection with section
5,44O, which was the one under which
Cooper wa. convicted. In presenting the
decision OF the majority Of the court, Judge
Bradford says;
'tAt common law conspiracy to com.
NIT q nisdemeanor or felony was only
n,isdemeanor. So conspiracy under sec-
ton 5, 44O not being declared felony, Is
also merely misdemeanor."
This decision settles the status Of Coop
er's offense and saves his citizenship with
out pardon. This is the second case Of
where an application for a pardon for
Delaware man failed to reach the Presi-
dent because it was not signed by the dis
trict attorney, or the judge who tried the