Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-11-17
COTS PARDON DENIED.
THE STATE BOARD YESTERDAY
DECIDED TO RECOMMEND IN
FAyORABLY
UPON Els APPLICATION.
The Case Reviewed at Considerable
Length by the Board-Pardons
Recommended for George Ensmfn-
ger and Nanny Golden-Adyerse
Action i'm the Case of Jas. II. Hall
Other Matters.


Other Matters.
The State Pardon Board was in ses-
sion in Moundsvi1le yesterday and took
up considerable time in the considera-
ton of the application of w. j. Colts,
| of Ohio county, who was convicted in
the Circuit Court of Marshall county
July 5th of forgery, and sentenced TO
three years confinement in the peni-
Tertiary. He is now in the Marshall
county Jail on stay of sentence in his
| case, now pending on writ of error in
the State Supreme Court. The recon-
mendation of the Board in this case,
embracing a review of the case, Is as
follows:
This is one of the most trying and diff
cult cases that this board has ever been
called upon TO decide. Voluminous papers
have been presented to the board and the
case has been urged at length both on the
side OF the applicant ana on the slde OF
the State. Numerous petitions signed by
reliable citizens have besn presented ana
members OF the family of the convicted
man have appeared before the board ana
insisted on his pardon.
THE innocence of Mr.. Colts is largely
relied upon by those pressing on his behalf
for recommendation for pardon, and the
records of the Circuit Court of Marshall
county have been presented to the board,
and it is earnestly urged that the SAID
court erred in entering Judgment against
him and sentencing him to confinement In
the peitentiary.
ON the question of the innocence of
Mr.. Colts the board has been practically
asked to reverse the Circuit Court of
Marshall county. The main question then
Tor US to consider Is whether We would be
| justified in doing this. The defendant APP
pears to have had a fair trial, so far as
| we can discern, and his motion to set aside
| the verdict of the jury and grant him a
new trial was passed upon by con-
Scientious, able and impartial judge. II
seems to be the view OF the attorneys OF
Colts, this being a case of forgery, that
proof of handwriting and comparison OIL
| the same is the main element In the case.
When we come to consider all the evidence
| that was offered before the jury on the
trial. we are compelled to take the View
| that the verdict of the jury was warrant
| ed by all that transpired in the trial OF the
case. We cannot see that II we mad been
| on the jury ourselves that we could have
| returned a different verdict from what 1t
| ala.
1T seems to US that the attempted ex-
PLANTATION made on behalf OF the defend
| ant of being in possession of the paper
| that was charged to be forged was such
| a one as cannot be received with any
weight. In fact it is not a reasonable or
| rational explanation, but such a one as
would go Tar in convincing a jury that
| Colts was guilty. But be all this as 1t
| may, the jury and the judge before whom
| the prisoner was tried We're in better
position to judge of all these matters than
| we now are. Ii is only in the rarest cases
| when there is clearly error, and where
| we are convinced that the jury is mani
| testify wrong, that on a mere showing of
| the record we would seek to disturb its
| verdict and Judgment OF the court on the
| same. This is not one of the cases which
| from a nero showing of the record we
| could disturb
gFfowever, this case has numerous other
| branches. What may be said to be the
| most prominent of these is along the line
| that was used in the defense of Colts:
| The affidavit of J. G. Harron to the effect
| that he obtained the paper alleged to be
| forged by Colts from disreputable wo-
man and sold and transferred 1t to Colts
| is filed. To support this James l.. Hawley
| and w. w. Arnett, the latter the attorney
| of Colts filed their affidavitS to the effect
| that while he, the said Colts, was negoti-
| ating for the purchase of the note alleged
| to be forged from Harron, he consulted
| them about the advisability of buying the
same. MIR. Colts filed his own affidavit
| explaining why this affidavit was not used
| on the trial Of the case. We do not see
/ how these affidavits materially strengthen
| the case of Mr.. Colts, and if the state
| ments in them had been offered to the
| jury as evidence, that body would have
| been justified in disregarding them. They
| are only along the line of the unreasonable
| explanation before referred 70. barron
| seems to be a somewhat ShadoWy person
/ and it is said that he Is a confirmed user
| of Stimulants, or what is known as a
| morphine fiend. At any rate nothing has
| been shown this board as TO his credibtl-
| ity. AS regards the affidavit of Mr.. Haw-
| ley and Mr.. Arnett, if MIR. Colts had been
| contempia ting the crime which he after.
4 wards appears to have carried out, he
| could very easily have had the conversa-
| ton he had with these two gentlemen.
| The paper Mr.. Colts is charged with
| forging was note Of $500 on one Squire
| HapeIdeld Haberfield at the time Colts
| first exhibited the paper was dead. One
| Of the branches of this case is an attempt
| TO impeach the evidence of one of the wit
| nesses who swore that the signature to
| the note of $500 was not that of Haberfeld.
| Affidavits are filed to the effect that this
| witness made statements previous to the
| trial of the case about the signature diff
| ferent from those made on the witness
| stand. The States might have dispensed
| with this witness and the jury still have
| been warranted in convtcting Colts. under
1 the lame explanation he made as to how
| he acquired the paper in controversy.
| Again numerous affidavits are filed at
| tempting TO show misconduct on the part
| Of the jury which convicted Colts. Now
| this matter as well as all to which refer
| ence has been made above was submitted
| to the judge of the court before whom
| Colts was tried on the motion to set aside
| the verdict of the jury and grant him a
/ new trial, and was acted upon by that
1 Judge. We hold that he was in q much
| better position to pass on all these matters
| than we are. If this board had to recon-
| mend the pardon of persons convicted of
| crime on technical errors or on some par
| ticular event which happened on the trial
| of nearly every case, there would be few
| men left in the pententiary. We regard
| for our purposes this alleged misconduct
| of this jury which tried Colts as entirely
| immaterial
| Eight Of the jurors before whom Colts
| was LTled sign a petition favor.ng his
! pardon. They urge his pardon for the
| reason that he is sixty-two years of age
| and on account of failing health superin-
| duced by his confinement There is no
| real evidence before us that Mr.. Colts is
| n bad health. We regard il as very bad
practice tor jurors to convict a man of a
heinous crime one day and petition for his
pardon the next
Several attorneys file a petition pray
ing for the pardon of Mr.. Colts saving
that from their knowledge of the testi-
mony and facts which developed later on
| they do not believe he should have been
convicted. We cannot act on the belief of
other men, no matter how conscientious
we may think they are, especially when
they DO not give US the facts which con-
vince them.
An unusually large number of petitions
and letters from business men, officials
and prominent citizens generally are filed
praying for the pardon of Colts Many
OF them contain splendid testimony in re-
gard TO his gcod character previous to this
I %~ -