ticians, but which certainly would be acceptable
to the people. They are willing that mercy
should temper justice, but not that justice should
be superseded in her office.
Mr. D. said, in conclusion, that the great ma-
jority of State Constitutions contained the quali-
fication he now proposed to attach to the pardon-
ing power, and in many States it had been in force
for a great number of years.
Mr. GRASON, in reply to the urgent call of the
gentleman from Anne Arundel, for reasons,would
say, that if "reasons were as plentiful as black-
berries," it was not pleasant to give them on com-
pulsion. He would, however, state such as oc-
curred to him. Suppose a man bears a chal-
lenge, and the fact is admitted and known to
every one, would it be necessary to have a trial.
as the gentleman suggests, if the circumstances
were such as to justify a nolle prosequi? Would
it be necessary to pay counsel for defending him
from a charge which he admitted to be true?
Take another case—apoor woman may bekeep-
ing house, without a particle of fuel to protect
herself and children from the cold, and may take
a few sticks of wood under the pressure of abso-
lute want. The circumstances may be known
to all, and all may wish the Governor to inter-
pose; but the gentleman from Anne Arundel
would have her imprisoned, and subjected to the
delay and torture of a public trial, in order that
the Governor should be prevented from abusing
his powers. Numerous cases might be stated,
but as the gentleman had only asked for a single
reason, it was needless to say more on this point.
Mr. G. then read an extract from a speech of
Chancellor Kent, on the subject of pardons. He
was aware that the Governor might err in exer-
cising this power, and sometimes in not exerci-
sing it. He believed that he had himself erred in
several instances, in which he had refused applications
for pardon. Lawyers and judges seemed
to think that the real facts of a case can only be
ascertained by a trial before the court and jury;
whereas it was notorious that material facts,
which were known to the whole community, and
which would decide the guilt or innocence of a
prisoner, were shut out by the rules of evidence
or concealed by the prevarication of witnesses.
Gentlemen seemed to believe that courts and
juries could never be deceived in the investiga-
tion of a criminal offence; and that it was pre-
sumption in the Executive to look behind the re-
cord for mitigating circumstances. He could
state a number of cases to show the incorrectness
of such an opinion. He had another objection lo
the amendment of the gentleman from Anne Arundel.
The amendment requires the Governor
to report every case to the House of Delegates.
Suppose a runaway slave to be arrested, and a
nolle prosequi to be granted at the instance of the
owner—what advantage could be derived from a
communication of the facts to either branch of
the Legislature? The bill now provides that
every case of pardon shall be reported, with all
the petitions and reasons, whenever required by
the Senate or House of Delegates. He wished
the Governor to have an opportunity of giving
his reasons, for he could then justify himself |
against unfounded imputations. He had no doubt
that the gentleman from Anne Arundel wished to
improve the section, but the amendment was
calculated to produce an opposite effect, and the
Convention ought to consider it carefully before
they adopt it.
Mr SPENCER was opposed to the amendment
of the gentleman, (Mr. Donaldson,) because it
would deprive the Executive of the power to
grant a nolle prosequi. He was disposed to leave
this attribute untouched in the hands of the Executive.
He had no doubt that the power is lia-
ble to abuse, but it often happens that truth
comes to light after trial and conviction. He
stated the case of a man who was convict-
ed of an offence and was recommended by the
jury to mercy. But the Governor happening to
be present at the trial, was thoroughly convinced
of his guilt. A new trial was granted in conse-
quence of some irregularity in the indictment,
and some lost evidence which the man on his
first trial urged, would prove his innocence if it
could be found, having come to light, his entire
innocence of the crime was proved. Numerous
cases of this kind were always occurring to re-
quire the exercise of this important power in the
hands of the executive. He could call the atten-
tion of the Convention to other cases. Take a
man whose character stands well, he did not
mean of adventitious character, but one moving in
any sphere of life, esteemed for his general amiability
of demeanor, throw him suddenly into a
scene of strong excitement, where he is suddenly
provoked by some violent attack on his honor,
and, under a momentary provocation, he seizes
a stick and inflicts a blow which fatally wounds
the traducer of his character. Public sympathy is
with him, but he has violated the law. In such
a case would you deprive the Governor of the
power of granting a nolle prosequi, when it is
known that he must otherwise be brought to
trial, and that the facts being proved in evidence,
he must be convicted? Would you say he should
not be pardoned before conviction ? Would you
compel him to sand in the felon's box, to hold
up his hand like a felon, and be consigned to a
felon's doom ? He would leave the power where
it has always been. He could cite cases of a
school master, a parent, a master of a family,
inflicting incautiously a blow which inadvertently
caused death. Yet every one knew that nothing
could be further from the intention of the parent,
and the effect of that blow would be to carry
that parent in sorrow to his grave. And would
you add to his agony by making him stand in the
felon's box?
Mr. BRENT, of Baltimore city, asked for the
previous question.
The previous question was ordered.
Mr. DONALDSON asked for the yeas and nays,
which were ordered.
The question was then taken on the amend-
ment of Mr. DONALDSON,
And decided as follows ;
Affirmative.—Messrs. Lee, Chambers, of Kent,
Donaldson, Dorsey, Wells, Randall, Kent, Sol-
lers, Crisfield, Dashiell, Hicks, Eccleston, Mc-
Master, Gaither, Davis, Weber and Smith—-17. |
