The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1910-05-19
LIFE IS SPARED
SAMUEL P HARDY
Governor Commutes Doomed
Mans Sentence to Life
Imprisonment
PRISONER OVERLOOKED
WHEN INFOkMED
Chief Executive Has High Respect
for Courts But Believes He
Should Prevent Suffolk
Man 8 Death.

On the eve of his electrocution al
the State penItenuary, Samuel n.
haruy, of SufLoik, conSic ted of killing
1lDerlus -AIrAGGhns- 1nnesy -relsip<t--fhv-
communication OF his sentence to Hfa
imprisonment from CO. ernor Mann.
ana was almost crazed with JOY when
the news reached MIN In murderers'
row Thursday morning.
In committing the sentence of the
doomed man, the governor issued =
statement covering four pages OF
typewritlng explaining his unwilling
ness TO allow HARDY TO go to the elec-
trio chair.
Governor Mann, probably mindful
of the recent comment directed
toward Governor Patterson, of Ten
nessee. for abuse of the pardon
privileges In the Cooper case. made
II plain in his statement that he llas
the highest respect for the verdtc&S
of juries and the decisions Of courts,
but Notwithstanding this he was loath
to allow Hardy to be electrocuted. The
governor said he had before him evil
oenee which was not adduced at the
trial OF Hardy and that he Is con-
WINGED that If the facts which he has
learned since the latter's conviction
We're presented to a jury to-day the
verdict would not be murder in the
first degree.
The Governors Statement.
The governors statement follows:
Deeply impressed with the res
sponsibillty Of my position which on
the one hand requires the due execu-
ton of the law, and on the other the
protection OF the citizen exposed to
unjust punishment, and with -
human lie depending upon my De-
cision and action, 1 have given 10
the case of Samuel p. Hardy the very
best consideration of which / arm
"a h1p nd think t know thG fartG n =
they appear in the record presented
TO and acted on by the supreme court
ct appeals. by the evidence Of onG
witness not examined In the trial. ana
! by the Hfffdavits flied before me Tor
and against the communication OF hiM
sentence.
! Il am, OF course, reluctant to In
| terfere with the action OF the jury try
| ing the case, or with the courts which
| have passed upon the verdict, but the
power of the executive to interferA
In cases like this was given for a pur-s
pose and doubtless because in some
cases its exercise, not according -
strict rule, would be In aid Of tustfca.
1T Is hardly necessary for me to ada
that have the highest respect Tor
the verdicts of 5uTies and the decisions
( of the courts OF my State. and Will
be very careful and conservative ~
pardoning those they have convicted
or even in changing the punishment
Imposed, but / viii do SO II In my
| judgment justice shall SO require.
I'm this case have evidence which
was not before the court and jury. ana
| / believe that II the trial OF Samuel
p Hardy could take place now In the
county OF Nansemond and before the
same Jury that convicted him and the
evidence as disclosed to me be intro
duced In court, that the verdict would
no the murder in the first degree.
am not. therefore, by my action pass
| ing upon the correctness either OF the
verdict of the jury or the decisions
! of the Circuit and Supreme courts
| which refused to grant a new trial.
Duty to Interfere.
1T must be remembered however,
that am not bounu by the rule gov
erning the Supreme Court. which can-;
not go outside of the record. ans
must regard the accused as demur~s
rant, who admits ali the Gurumuu-1
weaith's evidence to be true and
valves all OF his evidence in conntct
herewith, but the executive can and
should consider everything that tends
to show that the punishment aScex-s
tanned ought not to be inflicted. ana
think 1t Is my duty to interfere when
eveF-4H Judgment tt Is necessary
for the protection of the humblest cit-s
izen.
| Il have not hesitated. therefore, To-
/ get information from every source.
have read the affidavits of Witnesses
and have cross-examined one OF the
atlantis whose statements consider
ed most important.
! THE record shows that the murder
| of r. G. Jones took place in his yard
| on the night of October rs. about
| 1880 o'clock and that he was shot
! r,rs&y rna fs nd
with a pistol; that he said almost int-
| medfately after he was shot he wa
killed for telling the truth. and that
| in consequence OF the darkness he
could not see anyone: that he did not
hear anyone. but he thought Luke -
| Sam Hardy had shot him. This state
/ ment shows that. in the opinion OF NJ
Jones, there was at least two partiM4
who might be suspected Of the crirnAsS
am not. however. going into the ev9.H
dence further than to comment on III
alibi, which was partially proved hYE
one witness for the Commonwealth
and quite fully proved by three VIII
nesses for the defense; that II. II theNn
witnesses are entitled to belief. Hardy
was in his room at the residence ~
Mr.. Gus Holland. where he lived
about 10 o'clock or a little after 03G
the night OF the murder OF r. q. JOne0
which took place about 1880 o'cluE1E
in his yard. which VAS nearly mfe4S
from where Sam Hardy lived. II muU<'
be remembered that Mr.. Jones went t&|
Suffolk on the day he waz killed Gu1s
returned on train which Wa e3f~;
pected and actually reached HoiIm
at s:f3 that night; that the perS4|
or persons who killed him were tXiS
In wait, and In all human probah&3
were In the position occupied w1s
the shots were fred before or KnQ1
/ the time of the arrivai Of that h1n11
The record does not showat l40
! to my satisfaction--that any 0Iaa
these three witnesses were ixnpAnGe4
or contradicted. or that the extd6GG
of either one Of them was nhaken 49,
cross examination. SSS&
| Questioned Young LAZY. N. v
| TT ID evident. however, tAat 4