Evening capital news. (Boise, Idaho) 1901-1927, 1917-02-22

soi1CtHiuS 10 10 WIN III bringing VI
his papa home. sat early watching his
fathers face for some sign OF hope.
Fred Coleman sat listening attentive
~. The expression upon his face did
not change. When the words. the
prisoner is discharged" fell upon the
ears OF Mrs. Coleman. she could no
longer control her emotions, and tho
tears fell from her eyes. Coleman en-
braced his family and then received
the congratulations of several attorneys
and others in the court room.
Asked If he wished tusmnke state
ment for publication. Coleman replied
that he did not, that he cou'd not think
at this time, and again turned to his
children.
John Shook, former warden OF the
penitentiary, accompa MED s..leman to
the court room. and ut the conclusion
remarked. Justice will be done in the
end IL time is given"
Coleman left the court with his fam
lily clinging to him affectionately.
DEPUTY UNDER ALLEN.
Coleman was deputy under former
State Treasurer o. V. Alien, who con-
fessed to embezzlemen; and is still
serving "A sentence of Z, e TO 10 years.
Allen endeavored to obtain clcmency
from the former paI don board. but
failed.
When Allen was arrested Coleman
was in Portland. but returned at once
to Boise. He was arrested at the rail
road station here.
On Dec. /. 1914 he entered the district
court and when first arraigned enter
ed a plea of not guilty. Later In the
day he pleaded guilty and asked TO be
sentenced at once. His actual com
mitment was made on Dec. 26, 1914.
Ire delay being cause by the pending
treasury Investigations, and he has
served two years and two months of
q sentence of from two and one half
to 10 years.
JUDGE M'CARTHYs DECISION.
Judge Mccarthy filed written de-
cisIon Of some length. IT sustains the
Coleman contention, which was that
the former pardon board having com
muted his sentence, he was being il
legally deprived of his liberty. On the
question of Jurisdiction, the court holds
1t is empowered to pass upon the valid
ity of pardon board acts, the conten-
ton that the constitutional inhibition
as to district courts passing on claims
against the state ran to a case Of this
kind not being well grounded
The decision recites the salient points
Of the case as follows:
"On Jan. 6, 1916, the board Of
pardons adopted a rule to the eff
feet that no application for par
don or Communication Of sentence
by a person who had previously
been denied a pardon would be
considered by the board until six
months had elapsed after the date
upon which said pardon was de-
MED. on July 7, 1916. the petit
TONER had been denied a pardon.
In October, 1915, the regular ses-
sion OF the state board Of pardons
was held. on Dec. u, 1916, an
adjourned meeting of this Octo-
Der session was held al which
Colemans application was again
denied
'The meeting was adjourned un-
til Dec. 90, 1916. At this meeting
the application of Coleman was
reopened upon motion of Secretary
of State Barker who moved that "A
definite sentence be fxed In said
case at the minimum sentence OF
two and one-half years and this
motion was carried by vote Of
two to one. the attorney general
and secretary of state voting yes
and the governor no. The action
was duly recorded in the minutes
of the meeting and filed in the
secretary Of states office as re-
> CURED by the constitution.
The warden of the penitentiary
was duly notified and the proper
entry made in his books. No Ger
titicate signed by the governor and
secretary of state was sent to the
prisoner. 1t does not appear that
the rule of January 6 was ever
expressly or formally abrogated. 1t
does not appear from the minutes
of Dec. u or % that any objec-
ton was made to taking up the
case on account OF this rule. The
petitioners application for pardon
had been frequently before the
board and had been frequently
published.
Notice was first published in Oc-
tober. 1915. again In January. 1915.
again In April. 1916, and again In
November, 1915. Beginning No
Sember II, 1915. notice WAS pub
lished once a week for four weeks
that the petitioner would make ap-
pication for a pardon al the next
meeting Of the boail after legal
publication Of the notice.
In January, 1917, the personnel
Of the board changed. the governor
alone holding over. At meeting
of the board on Jan. 3, 1917, the
board attempted to rescind the
former action taken. and deprive
the prisoner Of the benefit of his
communication. A motion to this
effect was unanimously carried.
THE ground for the attempted
action as shown in the lengthy re-
eitals contained in the minutes are
first the claim that the commuta-