Year: 1873

TO ne EdttOr OF the tribune.


SIR: Whether Foster premeditated the kill
log Of Putnam and whether not the Court his trial
eighty charged jury questions which it
ne tho Governor should not now consider. They were
proper for the Courts TO pass upon and decide They
have argued before decided by the Courts and
IT would be dangerous 10 give TO the Governor supple
mental jurisdiction discretion large enough 70 review


and need be- reverse the rulings and decisions OF the
Court of last appeal known in the Jurisprudence Of the
.Etate.


Jts by no means certain that the murderous act Of
Foster vas unpremedtated 1t was not necessary to
constitute premedaton for Foster TO form purpose to
meet Putnam and kill him. II while on the with
Putnam he formed such purpose and between its for
nation execution dehberated fastened it,
tho premedtaton would be sufficient. The declarations
before the act better test Of purpose than those
made after But all OF Fosters declarations and acts
consistent with that 1uctuston that impulse and
reaction Of motive common to men under the influence
OF liquor. Fosters purpose may have been nothing
more than the hazy, dOgged vindictiveness
OF drunken man, unreasoning as TO
its motive aud Indifferent to its result. But
" CROPPED and shaped itself toward the most effective
at hand 10 accomplish its EXTREMIST possible de-
sire. II had some discrimination OF Itself
oaths expletves failed to suppress all its venom
The bent fist and the straight blow the readest
Of indioting a sufficient chastisement, not his
weapons OF Offense He took the worst and most dan
gerous implement he could find and hit his hardest with
st at the part his victims frame vulnerable
such attack Certainly, these facts permit discussion
aud difference OF opinion TO whether the act
were not premeditated.


II the Jury acted under mistake in rendering their
verdict az 70 its effect, better foundation pre-
sented Tor the Governors action. But In this
spect IL would have been wiser have applied to the
courts oueh mistake ought 10 form ground for a new
trial. certainty for motion TO have one. The conditions
mis-
and controverted The duty jurors in capital cases is
not pleasant one, and after rendering yerdct the
natural or ordinary feeling 70 soften s severity to
those 1t most affects. The average iurvman IA
always ready enough TO tell the friends or
counsel of the prisoner OF the stre.s and
oOnstraiht OF conviction under which the finding
was reached These feelings grow weaker with time
As the Jurors are removed from the Impressions az the
trial immediate effect OF the hearing discussion
OF the EVIDENCE and the guidance OF the Court their
Judgment will lapse into the general aud easy
disposition 20 impose hardship suffering ON DO one
The recommendations TO mercy frequently proceed from
desire mOdeiate a stern eOnoluslOD. Aud when II
happens IL may happen, that jurors arc appealed 10
Dg friends Of the convict who urge bis claims 10 mercy
and 10 favor il may be that the mistake VIII then be
INST made when tho jurors explain OF reconsider the
motives opinions entering INTO their actiOh ahd
verdict Oh the trial.


I have always supposed that the considerations in
nueDCng a Governor in DardOniug d convict or com
Gvtng Se1t0ues rete ea.sny those VI cienon1Y'