The Lafayette gazette. [volume] (Lafayette, La.) 1893-1921, 1900-07-21
THE PARDON board.


Louisiana has got new pardon mill. and
it appears to have gone to work with as
tonishing activity.
There ought to he a general rule with re-
gard to pardons that no pei son convicted by
jury and sentenced to death or hard labor
should be released from the duly declared
penalty, unless facts fully established and
not brought Out during the trial show the
innocence of the condemned. When a
pardoning board undertakes to discover and
declare Irregularities and defects alleged to
have occurred during the trial, it plainly
usurps the functions of a superior court. As
for pardoning felons because they are de-
clared to be in poor health, it is difficult to
see any reason to warrant such an interfer-
ing with Justice.
In order to make the work of the pardon
mill complete, the signature of the Gov
-rnor is necessary. Under the Constitution
of 1879 it seems to have been a rule that the
recommendations of the Pardon Board were
almost authoritative upon the Governor.
The constitutional provisions which now
govern is but little different from that of
1879. The difference is thus shown:
Constitution of 1898, section GO. The
Gov ernor shall have power to grant re-
and, except in cases of impeachment, or
treason, shall, upon the recommendation in
writing of the Lieutenant Governor At
torney General and presiding Judge of the
court before which the conviction was had
or of any two of them, have power IN HIS
DISCRETION to grant pardons, commute
sentences and remit fines and forfeitures,
after conviction. In case of treason he may
grant reprieves until the end of the next
session of the General Assembly, in which
body the power of pardon,ng is vested.
The words, s.in his discretion are all
that make the present constitutional provi-
sion on pardons different from that of 1879.
but they demonstrate that the Governor
does possess discretion and is not bound to
take orders from the Pardon Board. His
action in the premises will be watched with
interest.-New Orleans Picayune.
1t is to be hoped that the present
Board of Pardon will not be guilty
Of too loose exercise of the par
doning power. Nothing is more
harmful to the cause of justice than
the granting of pardons where they
are not justified by the facts.
Pardons should not be issued
merely at the requests of petitions
which are generally signed by the
trial juries and n,ne-tenths of the
population. Few men seem to
have the courage or backbone to
refuse to sign a petition for a par
don, particularly when it is pre-
sented to them by near relative of
the person seeking clemency. When
the pardon is granted these same
men, who signed the petition, are
generally the loudest in condemning
the Board and the governor. The
whole blame is laid at the door OF
the Board and the executive though
these authorities acted simply at the
request of the trial jury, the officers
of the court and the most promi-
nent and influential citizens of the
community where the offense was
committed.
We think it would best subserve
the cause Of justice if the Board
paid less attention t. numerously
sig ned petitions and more to the
facts. Should it be shown that a
man has been wrongfully convicted,
there should be no time lost in
granting a pardon in that case, OF
if it is ascertained that certain facts
brought to light after conviction
prove that the sentence is too Sc
we're, let clemency be extended i'm
mediately. But pardons which are
based upon petitions signed by PEG
pie who seem to be actuated by a
sickly sentimentality have a most
denoraIizing effect and tend tc
bring the courts into disrespect.