Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1926-04-23
The Governors Statement

The Governors Statement
Governor Brewster issued the fol-
Iowing statement on the removal of
sheriff Henry F. Cummings:
For the past year rumors have
heen prevalent as to conditions in
Kennebec county Jail. These rumors
crvstallized recently in connection
with widely published reports as to
irregularities both in the conduct of
the iail and in the handling of liquor
bv the sheriff of Kennebec county.
II was very generally recognized
that a thorough and impartial in
yestigation was essential to restore
nnblic confidence in the administra-
Iion Of the law and to do justice to
every official involved.
The chief of the State police was
instructed to make this investigation
in accordance with the advice of the
attorney general that the State Po-
lice department was clearly intended
TO have this as one of its duties I'M
der the law passed by the last leg
islature.
Following the investigation the
chief Of the State police, in carrying
out the obligations of his oath OF
office, filed complaint with the gov
ernor and council under the appro-
pirate constitutional amendment
charging the sheriff of Kennebec
county with dereliction of duty.
In accordance with the plain pro-
visions of the constitutional amend
ment as adopted by the people and
interpreted by successive admins
trations for the past 10 years and
as now conclusively settled by the
opinion of the majority Of the jus
tees Of the supreme judicial court,
there was due notice to the respond
ent and a hearing upon the COM
plant followed by a finding by the
majority of the members of the tri-
bunal, composed of the governor and
council, that the sheriff of Kenne-
bee county had been guilty of dere-
LECTION of duty upon the evidence
presented before the tribunal.
The amendment plainly provides
that after such q finding the gov
ernor may remove such official and
the opinion of the justices of the
supreme judicial court has made 1t
conferred upon the governor of the
out his constitutional obligation
to see that the laws of the state are
faithfully executed"
No evidence is required other
than the testimony of the respondent
himself to find that he has not
faithfully or efficiently performed
certain OF the duties imposed upon
MIN by law. His own admissions az
~ ~, 80 ~,
matters went far beyond the charges
SONS were an Indictment of his con
ception of the responsibilities en-
trusted to his care.
one of the most important duties
OF sheriff, particularly under the
deplorable situation as to crime in
me country today, is the safe con-
nnement OF the prisoners entrusted
70 MS care. This IS the provision OF
me statutes and the mandate Of the
court and prisoners can only be talk
en- from the confinement of the jail
OF the immediate custody of the
snerlH under certain specific stat
utory provisions with which there
was no pretense of compliance in
me present case. Prisoners may be
transferred to so-called work
jar there to be safely kept, or may
oe put at work upon the roads under
guard. There was no suggestion of
observing these limitations in the
jail. >''O - 'N' - >-'-@'
The respondent himself testified to
iepeated instances of prisoners sent
out TO do work at various private
houses and even being placed at
work away from the Jail for months
at time.
Custody and confinement would
entirely lose its meaning under prac-
nces OF this kind however we'll
meaning might be the purpose of the
one in charge. Practices of this kind
would also establish the precedent
Ior the peonage which has consti-
.uted such a serious reflection upon
~. ne administration of criminal law in
ile southern states. II sheriff may
III MS discretion place men. indis-
Intimately about the county in pri-
nale employment, the experience OF
penai institutions everywhere has
demonstrated that very serious evils
must inevitably result. 1t is not
,meceSsary, however to consider the
qnwlsdom of this practice since the
legislature has imposed a clear and
,unequlvocal duty upon the sheriff to
neep these prisoners confined. If the
SloVislons of our law and the man
uate of the courts are not to be OBJ
oesVed by the chief law enforcement
bblncer In a county there can be little
o mUpe OF preserving the integrity OF
our institutions,
VII ~ is clearly impossible for law
sioiators to have respect for laws
s which their custodians do not OBJ
serve. With what contempt must
o omey view an administration of
bit.nilnal justice based upon the ar
n nau,ary exercise of discretion SUI
perior to the law. Such practices
nicely calculated to give to us
!. government of men rather than Of
h"s ana the history of civilization
LAS demonstrated that such a gov
"ament is doomed to fail.
no another most important duty I'M
ivseo upon sheriff is the care Of
int INV liquors which may come
f oro ms custody in the process of en-
fni,,ihg the law. 1t is his duty care