Again, this right of pardon does not extend to
recent cases only, but to offences long since com-
mitted. After an individual has been some years
in the penitentiary, he is to some extent lost sight
of in the community. If an application is made
in his behalf, the lapse of time, the death of wit-
nesses, the forgetfulness of men, would make it
impossible to act upon the case with the same
facility, as if he were recently arraigned or con-
victed. In all these different rases, the degree of
notice varies with the particular instance brought
to the consideration of the Governor, and it
should beleft to his conscience to determine what
was sufficient information to the public. After
all he must finally determine for himself; and,
however strong the resistance may be, he can
under the power granted, exercise his discretion.
If the object is to make him amenable to public
opinion, the end will be accomplished by that
comment, which must ensue, if the notice of application,
which he directs, should be insufficient
for public remonstrance.
There is no reason to prescribe the way in
which this notice shall be given. It is not proper
to say that it shall he in a newspaper only,
because in thinly settled sections, the end may
be attainable only by proclamation. The Gov-
ernor will always conscientiously determine upon
the means, which are sufficient to inform the
public of the application made for clemency.
The question was then taken, and the substi-
tute of Mr. GWINN was rejected.
The question recurred on the adoption of the
amendment as amended
Mr, SPENCER moved for a division of the ques-
tion, (upon striking out,) which was ordered,
And the Convention refused to strike out.
Mr. GWINN then read a substitute which he
proposed to otter,
Mr. SOLLERS referred to a class of thieves
against whom he was anxious to guard. They
were the receivers of stolen tobacco; and were
well known to the Executive Department. He
referred tea case in which one of these depreda-
tors, whose guilt was notorious, who had got up
a petition to the Governor, and obtained a nolle
prosequi, when, had the fact of his application
been known in his neighborhood, every respect-
able person there would have petitioned against
it. Worse than that, this man was afterwards
made a justice of the peace. He desired to pro-
tect the Governor against these deceptions.
After a few explanatory remarks between
Messrs. TUCK and GWINN, in reference to the
substitute of the latter,
Mr. GWINN moved his substitute, when
Mr. BRENT asked for the previous question.
The previous question was then ordered.
The question was then put on the substitute of-
fered by Mr. GWINN, and it was negatived.
the question recurring on the amendment of
Mr. SOLLERS, as amended,
Mr. SPENCER moved for a division of the ques-
tion.
The question was then put on striking out, and
it was decided in the negative—ayes 27, noes 29.
Mr. DONALDSON moved to amend the section
61 |
by inserting after the word "pardons," in the first
line, the words "after conviction."
He said, every one must acknowledge that the
power of granting pardons before trial and con-
viction, was liable to great abuse; but to his
mind the abuse of it seemed so certain and the
benefits derived from its used, so insignificant,
that he thought it ought to be entirely taken
away. The power of pardoning after convic-
tion he would still retain. There were many
cases where it could be used beneficially, and the
cause of justice was in fact promoted by its judi-
cious exercise. It was sometimes necessary to
protect innocence against the prejudice and ex-
cited passions which have usurped the place of
judgment; facts might come to light after convic-
tion, which if known before trial, would have pro-
duced an acquittal; a man might be technically
guilty of a criminal charge, and yet the circumstances
might be such as would make it unjust or
peculiarly harsh, that he should suffer the penalty
by law affixed to that crime; and the subsequent
conduct of a convicted man might be such as to
call for some mitigation of his punishment This
reserved power of mercy in the Executive, when
properly exercised, gives greater certainty to the
administration of justice by our courts and juries.
Even that power should be more checked, than
it is by the sections under consideration, and he
proposed, if not cut off by the previous question,
to offer another amendment, requiring the Go-
vernor to report all these cases to the Legislature,
whether called upon or nut. Cut in regard to the
amendment now proposed he would say, that he
did not know of a case in our present state of
society in which a pardon, before conviction,
would be productive of any benefit worth estima-
ting, when compared with the evils arising from
the exercise of such a power. The only just
ground for exercising the power, was for the protection
of innocence. And what innocent man,
when suspicion is once attached to his name,
would not court, rather than evade, a trial? If
evidence enough, of whatever sort, could be pro-
duced against him to cause a grand jury to pre-
sent him a fair, and open trial was his only pro-
lection from the tongues of calumny. If a false
and malicious accusation could be entirely smoth-
ered by a pardon, then there might besome rea-
son for retaining the power, but the slightest
whisper of such a charge is caught up by the
public press and spread far and wide. In these
times, there is no power to seal the accuser's lips,
and he who seeks, by the interposition of the
Executive, to shield himself from trial, fixes on
his character stain that cannot, be effaced.
Mr. D. called upon those who opposed this
amendment, to state the cases which justified
such an interposition, that they might be tested,
to see whether there was anything to outweigh
the great public policy of permitting the adminis-
tration of justice to take its course until judgement
was rendered. This is a matter in which
all good citizens are deeply concerned, and the
manner in which the pardoning power had been
abused, is a subject of general complaint. To
place these restrictions upon it, would be a re-
form which might not commend itself to the poli- |
