Arkansas, western Nov. 2, 1888 Manslaughter
Feb. 2, 1889: to be hanged ....do Apr. 19, 1889; June 6, 1889, commuted to imprison. ment for life.
Dec. 23, 1890; 5 years in Eastern Pennsylvania penitentiary, to commence as of Nov. 25, 1890.
Granted. This convict was sentenced to be hanged for murder and his sentence com- muted to imprisonment for life more than 4 years ago. In any view of the case there seemed to be on the proof a lack of delib- eration which belongs to the crime of mur- der. Since his commutation such proof has been presented and such light has been shed upon the incriminating evidence given upon the trial that the judge who presided at the trial and the district at torney who prosecuted the convict recom- mend his pardon. It seems to me that this recommendation is abundantly sustained on the ground that the prisoner's guilt has not been established and there is a strong probability that he is innocent. Granted upon the recommendation of the dis trict attorney who prosecuted the convict and the judge who sentenced him. It ap- pears that there was much provocation for the assault of which the convict was found guilty, and the jury who convicted him recommend him to mercy. He has already been imprisoned more than 3 months. Granted. The imprisonment already suf- fered by this convict, added to his im- paired health, lead me to the conclusion that the ends of justice will be subserved by his release.
May 17, 1893 Assault with intent July 18, 1893; 1 year from to kill. date in Minnesota State prison and costs.
List of pardons granted by the President during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1894-Continued.
This pardon is granted for the purpose of restoring the convict to his rights of citizenship. Proof has been furnished me that his conduct since the expiration of his term of imprisonment justifies this act of clemency.
June 8, 1893; 1 year's impris. Nov. 8. 1893 Granted. This convict has now been imonment in jail at Musco
Apr. 18, 1893 | Violation U. S. banking laws.
prisoned 5 months, which, it seems to me, is abundant punishment for his offense, con- sidering all the circumstances surrounding the case.
Granted. It seems to be conceded by all those conversant with this case that this applicant's rights of citizenship should be restored by a pardon, and it appears to me to be preeminently a proper case for such action. Granted. I do not intend to interfere, as a rule, with convictions upon which no sen- tence has been pronounced. If judges and district attorneys think persons indicted ought not to be punished, the indictments better be abandoned by them instead of bringing about a conviction and immedi- ately following it with a request for par- don. In this case, however, the request for clemency, both from the judicial and prosecuting officers concerned in the case, and from prominent citizens, are so strong and persuasive that I yield to them.
Granted. This convict has been imprisoned 8 months, being two-thirds of the term for which he was sentenced. The offense of which he was convicted, however, is such as to make me averse to interfering with the judgment of the court. I am only led to do so because I deem it proper to recog- nize the praiseworthy conduct of this prisoner in defending the warden of the prison where he is confined against a dan- gerous attack by desperate prisoners in revolt.
Granted on condition that the pardon shall be void and the convict shall serve the re- mainder of his term if at any time here- after he shall be guilty of carrying a pistol or any other deadly weapon. I do not propose to interfere in cases of this kind, and only do so in this case because the applicant is an old colored, wounded sol- dier, and peaceably disposed.
Granted. This convict is undoubtedly a bad woman. The papers and information sub- mitted on this application, however, con- vince me that her conviction and sentence are not, beyond a reasonable doubt, just and fair. Let this pardon be upon the ex- press condition that the convict immedi- ately leave the United States and hereafter remain outside its borders.
Mar. 16, 1892; 2 years' im- Nov. 10, 1893 This convict has served the term of prisonment in the Detroit
house of correction and $600 fine.
Sept. 18, 1893; 5 months in Dec. 22, 1893 the penitentiary of Utah.
imprisonment to which he was sentenced. He is critically ill with consumption, and has but a very short time to live. His fine is remitted because he is unable to pay it, and the further imprisonment which its non-payment entails might result in his dy- ing in prison instead of among his friends. Granted. This applicant has been quite severely punished for the offense of adul- tery, and I believe that this fact, added to the voluntary promise he makes to ob- serve in the future the law which prohibits this offense, render clemency in his case entirely proper.
Granted on the recommendation of the judge who sentenced the prisoner and the dis- trict attorney who prosecuted him Granted. The prisoner has served nearly the entire term of his sentence and has been sufficiently punished. His release will be an act of mercy to his suffering family.
List of pardons granted by the President during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1894—Continued.
Reason for the exercise of Executive clemency.
Sept. 8, 1893; 5 months in Dec. 22, 1893 Granted on representation of the judge who the penitentiary of Utah.
sentenced and the district attorney who tried the prisoner.
Granted. I understand this convict's sen- tence will expire in a few days, and inas- much as there are features of the case that raise a doubt in my mind as to his guilt of the charge of unjustifiable assault, I have concluded to pardon him. Granted.
Granted for the purpose of restoring the ap- plicant to his rights of citizenship. Granted. It seems that there was a good deal of provocation for the assault of which this prisoner was convicted. His character seems to have been very good; he has suffered 7 months' imprisonment, and both the judge who sentenced him and the district attorney who prosecuted him recommend his pardon. For these reasons it is granted.
Sentence commuted to 1 year's imprison- ment, on the ground that such shorter term will, in my opinion, in view of all the facts, subserve the ends of justice.
Granted. This is an application for restora- tion to citizenship, after suffering the pen- alty of crime. The good character of the applicant before the commission of the offense of which he was convicted, and his conduct since his release from imprison- ment, abundantly justify this act of clem- ency.
Granted. The incidents surrounding the commission of this convict's offense, and his conduct since, satisfy me that if he was guilty of any crime (of which there seem to be grave doubts) the punishment he has already suffered is abundant to answer the ends of justice.
June 30, 1893; to be hanged Jan. 5, 1894 Sentence commuted to imprisonment for life. Jan. 12, 1894.
September term, 1893; months at hard labor in county jail, and $300 fine.
Oct. 28, 1893; $200 fine and 3 months in Jefferson County jail.
Dec. 14, 1893; $106 fine and 30 days in Kenton County jail.
Granted on the ground that the convict's mental condition is such as to render it exceedingly probable that longer impris- onment will result in his becoming hope- lessly insane.
Jan. 17, 1894 Granted. The judge who sentenced this prisoner and the district attorney who prosecuted him recommend his pardon. His term of imprisonment has nearly expired, and he is utterly unable to pay the fine imposed upon him.
Jan. 20, 1894 Granted on the ground that the convict's physical condition is such that he can live but a short time, and upon the recom- mendation of the judge who sentenced the prisoner and the district attorney who prosecuted him.
Dec. 2, 1892; 2 years in Feb. 2, 1894 Granted upon the sole ground that the health house of correction, De- troit, Mich.
Caspar C. Stephenson.. Michigan, western.. Sept. 13, 1893 Embezzling money from post-office.
of the convict is such that further confine- ment will hasten a fatal termination of his disease, which even under more favorable conditions will probably not be long post- poned. Granted. I have arrived at a favorable con- clusion in this case, after much doubt and hesitation, and I feel that it is only justi- fied by the belief that in the peculiar cir- cumstances surrounding the case this act of mercy is not in derogation of the objects and purposes of the criminal law. The good character of the applicant, the entire absence of any indications of a deliberately formed criminal intent, and the recom- mendations of the jury and district attor- ney have influenced my action to a great extent.
« PreviousContinue » |