Year: 1878

The case of the unfortunate men, Cham.
ber and Collins, demands tho most mercifnl
examination by the Governors in whose hands
the lives of these men rest. 1t is very true,
that the finding of the jury, and the judg-
ment of court of last resort, entered upon
such finding are entitled to high consid-
GRAFTON: but the lives of two men, however
humble they may be, are Of still higher i'm
portance. The God.like power ofpardon is
conferred upon the Governor by the organic
law, to be exercised in case of mistake or
error In the trial or conviction of a citizen.
The true way to approach the Case is to ems
deavor to occupy the position of the court
and jury; and judge oy the aid Of the after
discovery of testimony in the cast. This duty


is the more sternly demanded ofthe Cover
nor in this State than elsewhere, as there is
no appeal here from the judgment of the
Court of Oyer and Terminer, in a criminal
case. Strange is the anomaly. An appeal
lies to the Court of Appeals, from the su-
perior Court, to settle dispute, as to who
shall use water course through an alley,


(if two persons claim that right,) but not
for either the life Or liberty Of a citizen ?
1t will be thus seen that the responsibility
of the Governor is very great.


Chambers and Collins were convicted


mainly upon the evidence Of two persons;
both of whom, 1t is quite clear, committed


wilful and deliberate perjury, both before


the Magistrate in the primary hearing, the


grand Inquest and the trial jury. This we


believe is conceded. Their testimony, as to
their marriage, was material, as IT laid the
ground on which to attack their credibility
AZ witnesses; hence If they perjured them
selves, in this regard it was material part
of their evidence: and could its fslsity been
shown to the jury at the trial of the cause,
no twelve m en- would have dared to convict
the prisoners. It was not shown, for the
reason that It was not within the knowledge
of the prisoners counsel, and hence proper
" comes under the head Of the discovered
testimony. In view of the discovery Of the
perjury the Governor is called upon to cors
rect the finding of the jury; by the light he
now has, and by the weight of the testi"


mopy standing against the prisoners. It 10
said they confessed the connection with
the woman. They were not on trial for
that; but for forcible outrage, and the


proof of the outrage was limited to the tes-
timony oltho woman and man who stand


with perjury upon their souls.


The condemned men are poor and friend
less-the greater reason far broad and lib


eral consideration of their case, and the
more honor to those who expoused their
cause. 1t So well settled principle in law, :,
that If witness is proved false In one par


ticular, he is to be treated as unworthy of


belief in all. This rule of law was no later,
than Tuesday last, commented upon by


Judge Van Brunt. of the Supreme Court OF
New York in the Lopez Divorce case.


LOPEZ" says the Judge, "having sworn
to what he knew to be untrue and false,
comes under the rule by which both Judge
and Jury should be governed, which con-
demns his whole testimony. When witness


Las once been impesched, neither Judge
nor Jury should place reliance on any of his
testimony. The defendant has, to my J udR
ment, sworn to an untruth and consequently
no reliance is to be placed on any OF bis
evidence"


We join with other citizens in imploring


the Governor for justice tempered with
| mercy. We have no hesitation in saying
that with an Impeachment of perjury
| against the two principal witnesses for the


State, If these two men are hanged, It will
| at least create grave doubts as to whether
| their execution was not a judicial murder
One fact must not be forgotten. that tho
confession of the men without the testimony
of Ciegg, and his mistress, would have been
IN insufficient to convict. The Governor is q
lust man lei him have care, that mercy
one Of Gods noblest attributes, shall hay g
large and liberal influence upon his de-