Bisbee daily review., 1915-06-01
.DR, SIMS EXPRESSES
 VIEWS OF SENATE
 ON FINANCING" ISSUE
Writes to BiSbee Resident That Upper House Did Moi Let MaudIin Sympathy Interfere With the Law.

In reply to a letter written by cit.- zen of Bisbee. Dr. ". P. Sims. pre4f dent of the Senate expresses his views as follows on the situation attending -he efforts of Governor Euut to i4uor. the Arizona law relating to clp.ta punishment
 Your letter of May lS received. can hardly express my appreciation of this kind letter, as it is one Of a few which comes to 8 man in my position that ! feel comes from the heart Of his people
 "The matter Of the action Of tho Pardon Board seems. ot a glance, O. mo concern Co the Senate, but tae ac,- ion Of the House and the inasteuca cl our governor that tho Senate eEpr.s. itself lief, no alternative.
 "I was in the First Legislature that to avoid the loss ol Juo entire Penal Code after the entire Code had been vetoed twice by the Governor passed Che Code containing the Board of Par dons provision by a vote of l7 to 9. At the time the Senate took this act. ion, it was generally understood that the Governors friends would file z. referendum against the Pardon Board section of the Penal Code. This wa. done. and at the same election the Governors friends initiated an am endmeHt 10 the Constitution proFid ing for no capital puaishmou. u tl.s State. The people of this state upheld the Prison Pardon Board Provision Cf the Penal Code and @ the same eiec ton voted down the question of the abolishment of capital punishment
 do not believe that it ie yet reaiizal that both measures were voted down by such an overwhelming majority l Out Of 52009 votes in the state. only lS,O00 voted against the Pardon Board Provision. It is safe to estimate that the balance of this vote was opposed to the abolshment of capital punish. ment and was in favor of sustaining the Pardon Board provision of the Penal Code
 Not satisfied with thi5 the matte, of Che Pardon Board was then taken into the courts and carried to the Su. preme Court Of this state. where It consttutiouality was proven.
 When this legally constituted Par don Board took mp thc matter of com- mutation Of sentence for the five con dcmned Meyicans in going over the record they found that on December 2 the Governor said. in reviewing the cases where clemency was asked. chat Ae found no cxtchuatine circumstanc cs in any of tho eases and refused tC tcke action Tn View of the fact that the legislature, the people and the courts had all approved the Pardon Board. ] could not let maudln sym pathy and manufactured sentiment iu- terfere with what thoueht mean, law Interference Of the State of AIi-| .ona It was not a question before the Senate os Go whether or not wei believed in capital punishment or. whether or not we believed thc uen guilty but purely one Of law enforce mcnt
 "fhe moves of the lost few days 10 save the lives of these men aIe cer- tainiy open to criticism. lt seems hardly possible that Maytoreua of Son .ora and Villa Of Mexico, could have ln- iorested themselves through the De- partment of state at Washington, n- less their action had been inspired by some source (easily recognizeable) in Arizona. It is generally understood here that two MeXicans of this city communicated with Viscarra of Tue son who, in turn, Communicated with Mayteronu who interested Villa