The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1913-12-17
PARDoNS AND IYNCHING.
Has the pardonins of convic,

jr &sS SAAs w NV "SSss
ing A good many people believe it
has. 1t is pointed out thai q life
sentence is not necessarily served out,
Min fact, that it is seldom served out,
but that the man SO sentenced may
reasonably look forward to release aft
Iner q number of years imprisonment.
ciHence, we are told. men will seize and
1nlynch a prisoner. before or after con-
eviction. because OF the belief that I'M
p,less they do SO the ma will sooner or
oila&er be at large again, to be a men.
Staee to society.
1t would be interesting to compare
tho prevalence Of lynching in states
Nwhere the death penalty is commonly
Gthe sentence for first degree murder.
and that sentence is commonly carried
out. with the prevalence of lynching
in the states where, either because Of
S,the abolition, OF capital punishment
by Law, or because Of a general Gus
tom, h death sentence is seldom or
ppnever carried out. Data on the sub
lject exists but 1t is not available at
lithis time . Our guess would be, how.
Gsaver. that the frequency of capital
punishment md the frequency Of
s,lynchins run quite closely together.
pThe reason for his assumption is that
both capital punishment by law and
Hlynching without law are brutal, bar
Nharous, n belong to conditions in
Hsociety which are fast being outgrown
a ard which have, in many localities,
u heen measurably outgrown.
AS to the pardon Of convicts. or the
denomination of their sentences. there
10 a great deal Of loose talk on the
: subject without information on which
to base it. The deliberate killing Of
. human being is, under the Law,
II der in the first degree. and If the facts
). show thar such an offense has heen
n committed, a jury has no choice but
a to convict. and either judge or jury
q must fix the penalty at not less than
g life imprisonment. Yet everyone
! tons even in first degree murder.
! There is no comparison between the
/. killing Of q man in the heat OF pas
sion, under great provocation. even
i although h act may have been quite
I deliberate so far as the planning Of
It, and the intent are concerned, and
such a murder as was committed by
culbertson. who killed three persons
! without provoeation, and in cold
blood. Yet the men who committed
8 what il naanifestly the lesser offense
must be n to the penitentiaEy un-
der q life sentence. Under the law
] he 10 a murderer. In such q case It
/! 10 human, legitimate and wise that
at some future time, If the facts ap.
II pear to warrant 1t. such q prisoner
:; should be released. That 10 what we
!! have = hoard Of pardons for. At one
: time the pardoning power was vest
cd in the governor alone. In order
to relisve that ofacial of such a heavy
responsibility. undivided a. 1t was,
h board Of pardons was created, in
order that each application for a par
don or Communication should be thor
oughly Investigated. all the facts be-
ing ascertained. and that several men
should then be able to act dispasston.
ately on the matter, Just al a court
would ~ad5udicate q case.
AZ the last meeting OF the board Of
pardons several persons imprisoned
tfor murder were pardoned or had
their period Of service 'lessened. It
il fair to suppose that the board act
ed on full information. and that its
members believed that the facts which
had been ascertained made 1t their
duty to act as they did . These men
do not seek to turn a lot Of criminals
loose IN society, and a great deal of
the criticism that is heard 10 based
on utter lack Of information concern
ing the case. its surrounding circum-
stances. the record Of the prisoner,
and other essential facts.
We doubt that the %pardoning Of
convicts has anything to do. with the
crime Of lynching. We believe rather
that this crime IL committed as a rule
in response to a savage lust for blood
which ID probably latent in most Of
US, and which becomes predominant
under the influence Of the mob.