New Britain herald., 1925-11-28
Cites Legal Reasons Why
 He Thinks COolidge's Communication Is Wrong -Groehl Ready for Fight on Habeas Corpus Writ.

ed slayer of New Britain police man, is playing the role of lawyer az ho awaits receipt of the repricyc which sets forward until March the date Of his execution by the state of Connecticut, Governor Trumbull signed the reprievc last night while John Coolidge, the presidents son, looked on. 't almost inc same mo- ment, in the deathhouse at the Wethcrstield state prison, Chapman handed to Frederick J. Groehl of New York, his senior counsel five closely written sheets which, his counsel announced. will be the basis of his plea 10 be returned 10 the At lanta penitcntiary when he appears before Judge Thomas in the board of pardons room of the prison Mon day morning.
 Criticizcs President Criticism of President Coolidge for signing his communication Is a keynote of the brief the condemned man prepared in the clean cell which heaped-up law books had given the air of law office, Chapman's con- tentions are:
 That the power 10 pardon and the power to commute are not two separate instruments that the essential spirit of thiG instrument is of forgiveness and mercy and that it's privileges shall be gifts and not punitive or inimical forces to place their lives and liberties in further jeopardy.
 "That ii is not within this power 10 substitute a greater for ! lesser punishment that there has not been mp till date any instru- ment devised by legislative enact ment . to remove your poti- { tioner from the jurisdiction into which he was placed for a term of 25 years before the cx- piration of such term"
 The Vital Question Commenting upon this brief. Groehl remarked, "who asked for a communication? I think that is very important. No one has asked for 1t but Hugh M Alcorn. the states attorney. It cannot be given, we hold, unless the person to he hone- fitted by it asks for 1t, think that I is vital thing"
 Chapnan', Text
 l The text Of the argument written l by Chapman in his cell follows:
 'That the power to pardon and the LpoWer 10 commute are not two sep arate instruments, but merely great, pr and lesser uses of the one instru- mcnt upon one under judgment; That the essential spirit of this in strumcnt is of forgiveness and mercy: That thr very idea and in tent imhuing inc legislative act. which gives 10 the president com, initiative power, is that hc shall usc it when inspired hy good will and mcrCifui intent toward the recipient of its favor, or lcsscning of tho puni- tive demand of justice, and that per sons under judgment shall strivo. by good behavior and all commrndabIc means, 10 earn tho gifts within tn" grants of this power. and that its privileges shall he gifts anl not punitive or inimical forces 10 place their lives and liberties in further icon0rdv.
 "That it Is not within the privilege , of this power 10 substitute nor 10 bo accessory 10 the substitution of q greater for lesser punishment. That the original intent of the leg islative act was 10 empower the president with tho privilege to cxcr- else the allcviatiye virtues against whatever he might deem excessive or unnecessary punitive docrcos; and that the original intent and nature | of such legislative net remains i'm mutahle until further legislative act shall change the nature and intent by due process of amendment.
 "That any force acting against thc welfare of persons subject to thc favor of this Intentionally honefccnt power augmcntation of punishment. evasion of legal safeguards were never intended 10 hc in the nature of the original legislative idea and act and cannot now be injected into the idea and act.
 That there has not cen up tin date any instrument devised by leg islative enactment of sufficient legal force 10 remove your petitioner. without violation of his constitution al rights and without contraveninE the decision Of inc r. s. supreme court that the judgment of a state court cannot interrupt the prior judgment of |. s. court, from the jurisdiction into which he was plac- cd hy due process of law for a term of twenty-file years before the law full expiration Of such term.
 That 10 cvade these legal safe guards an effort has been made to Iunlawfully suhvert from its true ma. ture the communicative power Of the