The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1902-02-23
COURT SAY He HAS POWER
A Dict1m OF the North Carolina Sup.
RENE Court to That Effect.
FEDERAL AND STATE CONSTITUTION ALIKE
Il Has Been Held That the President Has
Power 10 Pardon Persons Punished
Of Contempt by Federal
Judgrs.

JuOSro'
Governor has the power TO pardon for
This paper has quoted the opinion Of
"a leading lawyer" to the effect that the
Governor has no power to pardon for con-
tempt, citing the opinion of Governor
Fowle to the effect that he could not ex-
ercise such power. The question Is Of
Importance, and we give below the opin-
ion OF another leading lawyer" who
gives his reasons for believing that the
Governor has the power to pardon for
THE GOVERNOR CAN PARDON.
When the question as to the power of
the Governor to grant reprieve or to
pardon prisoner, convicted of contempt
OF court, was presented by the applica-
ton Of Gorham. the opinion, TO a large
extent, prevailed among the members of
the bar that the Governor had no power
in the case.
Several eminent lawyers so expressed
themselves, through the press. The
question appeared TO be one of first i'm
preston in this State, although upon in
yestigation it appears that it has been
considered and determined, at least, by
dictum OF the Supreme Court.
The Federal and the courts of several
other States OF the Union have passed upon
and recognized the existence of the pow
CT. The question has been considered by
several OF the Attorneys General Of the
United States and decided by them in ia
vor Of the existence OF the power. 1t
may not be uninteresting to notice the
language of some OF tho judges in dis
GUESSING the question
The President of the United States is
by article 2. section 2 Of the Constitution
invested with power to grant reprieves
and pardons for offences against the
United States except in cases OF impeach-
mens.
The Circuit Court of the United States,
In re William Muller VS.. BIatch. page
3D. held that the power to pardon In
cases OF contempt was by this article OF
the Constitution conferred upon the Pres
ident. Judge Blatchford, delivering the
opinion. saws;
mir. Attorney General. Mr.. Gilpin. GO
Opinion of Attorneys Generals 622) de-
cided that the pardoning power extended
To such case. and that the contempt
was an offense within the language CT the
u.
concnr in that view
Mr. Attorney General Nelson. in 1874
thus concludes an opinion upon the ques-
ton: THE pardoning power clearly en-
braces the case"
The Supreme Court of Louisiana GA
La. Ann. page 121) In discussing the
question saws:
The next inquiry is has the Governor
i've NJ
viction and punishment OF contempt OF
authority of q court. The Investigation
which we have been able to make of this
question does not satisfy US that the
chief executive officer of the State is
without power to extend pardon to a par
~ convicted and punished for a contempt
OF court. We find nothing In the Consti-
tuition OF the State which makes an ex-
ception In such cases That the President
OF the United States is clothed with the
power to grant pardons, in cases where
judges OF the United States Courts pun
ish for contempt, is clearly settled
There being no exception in our State
Constitution precluding in such cases, the
exercise of the partioning prerogative by
the Governor of the State we feel no hest
fancy in recognizing its existence.
contempt OF court Is an offense against
the State and not an offense against the
Judge personally. In such q case the
State is the offended party and it belongs
TO the State. acting through another de-
partment OF its government, to pardon
or not TO pardon at its discretion, the
Uffense."
The High Court OF Errors and Appeals
OF Mississippi, in eX parts Hickey, says
The whole doctrine of contempt goes
10 the point that the offense is q wrong
&c the public. not to the person OF the
functionary to whom ii is offered merely
az an individual. 1t follows then that
contempts are either crim.S Or misde-
meaaors in proportion 10 he aepravation
c. u oifense. and as such are included
Will in the par,iari IL power CT the State"
Mr. Rapolje. In his book on Contempts.
citing these authorities. treats tie ques-
ton as settled-Lea 162.
The Supreme Court OF this state. in tn,
case OF Herring vs.. Ppgh 1885,, speaking
OF the mode OF relief open TO the parties
convicted OF contempt says:
We can AFFORD them no relief but must
sustain the order OF His Honor Judge
Bryan for the reasons given in this opin-
ion. yet 1t may be that relief nigh: be
sought successfully through another
source, executive clemency, for under the
provisions Of the Constitution OF the
State. article II, section 8. such power