« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
6. ELIAs M. Wheeler— Convicted before a justice's court of Columbia county, August 24, 1870, of assault and battery, and sentenced to imprisonment in the county jail of said county for twenty days, and to pay costs of prosecution. Pardon granted September 3, 1870, upon statement cf Hon. J. J. Guppy, county judge of Columbia county and the district attorney of said county, which clearly shows that this man was improperly convicted because of a misapprehension of the case by the justice of the peace.
7. WILLIAM Suultz—
Convicted before a justice's court for the county of Jefferson, ou the 23d day of February, 1870, of the crime of forgery, and thereupon sentenced to imprisonment in the county jail of said county for the term of one year. Pardon granted July 23, 1870, upon the recommendation of the judge who tried, and district attorney who prosecuted, and other citizens, because it is evident the offense was committed without the intention to do wrong or defraud any one. He is only technically guilty and had been punished too much. His health has ocen injured by confinement, and justice required his release.
8. Jon ATHAN WEstonii Aven— Convicted before a justice's court in and for Sauk county, October 27, 1870, of the crime of larceny, and sentenced to imprisonment in the county jail of said county, for the period of ninety days. Pardon granted November 25, 1870, upon recommendation of county officers, county judge, district attorney, chairman county board of supervisors, and many citizens. The property stolen was trifling in value, and was returned to the owner. The prisoner is a young boy, and it does not appear that when he took the property he intended to steal it. He had been sufficiently punished.
9. ANDREw PATTERSox—
Convicted before a justice's court for Outagamie county, September 10th, 1870, of the crime of assault and battery, and sentenced to pay a fine of $30 and costs of prosecution, and in default of payment, to be committed to the county jail till fine and costs are paid. Commited in default of payment. Pardon granted November 26th, 1870, on recommendation of county board of supervisors of said county. Prisoner is very poor, and could not pay the fine; had been punished sufficiently, and justice did not require his further confinement.
10. PHILIP RoAch— Convicted before a justice's court for Dane county, Dec. 12, 1870, of assault and battery. Sentenced to pay a fine of $1 00 and costs of prosecution, amounting to $23.23, and in default of payment committed to jail. Pardon granted Dec. 14, 1870, cn the application of the justice who imposed the fine and other good citizens. The justice's statement shows that the prisoner was not guilty of more than a technical assault, and that if all the facts had been before him, he should not have fined the boy. The boy is a poor, hard-working laborer, and unable to pay the fine. Pardon granted by Lieutenant-Governor Pound.
From House of Correction, Milwaukee County.
1. Thomas W. FLYNN–
Convicted before municipal court of said county, January 13, 1869, of the crime of larceny, and sentenced to imprisonment in said house for one year. Pardan granted five days before the expiration of his term, upon the recommendation of the Inspector of the House of Correction, because of his exemplary eonduct in prison and his evident repentence.
2. JAcon Burn ER—
Convicted before the municipal court of said cornty, October 8, 1869, of the crime of assault, and sentenced to imprisonment in said house for six months. Pardon granted January 20th, 1870. upon statement of reliable citizens of Milwaukee county, that th prisoner has always been industrious and borne a good reputation. that he was indicted for assault with intent to kill, but his plea o assault without such intent was accepted. The assault was pro" voked by the person assaulted. The ends of justice did not require his further imprisonment.
3. MARY JANE Buake —
Convicted before the municipal eourt of said county, October 14, 1869, of the crime of larceny, second offence, and sentenced to imprisonment in said house for two years. Pardon granted February 9, 1870, at the request of the inspector of the house of correction. The prisoner was a married woman, and pregnant, and about to be confined. Suitable care and accommodations could not be given to her in the prison during confinement. Humanity dictated that, under the circumstances, she be released and taken by her husband to his home in Iowa.
Convicted before the municipal court of sail courty, May 10, 1870, on charge of vagrancy, and sentenced to imprisonment for 30 days, in the house of correction. Pardon granted May 25, 1870. The man is quite old, has a large family dependent on him for support. He was convicted because of habitual drunkenness, more to sober than to punish him. After a few days confinement he promised to take the pledge, and refrain thereafter from the use of liquor. Pardon granted to aid him in this resolution.
5. MARY Cuddeh Ey— Convicted before the municipal court of said county, June 25,
1870, on charge of being intoxicated, and sentenced to the house of correction for thirty days. Pardon granted July 2d, 1870, on the statement of Judge Mallory, of the municipal court, that had he been aware that the woman had a very young infant at home he should not have sentenced her, as the child required her care. Released on grounds of humanity.
5. John KINNEy—
Convicted before the municipal court of said county, April 25th, 1870, of the crime of assault and battery, and sentenced to pay a fine of $20 and costs, and to stand committed to said house till fine and costs were paid. Pardon granted July 6th, 1870, because of ill health of prisoner. His family were dependent on him for support, and his punishment fell heaviest on them. The offense was ommitted while the prisoner was intoxicated, and his pardon is granted on condition that he never again drink intoxicating liquor as a beverage.
7. DANIEL SULLIvan— 8. Eugen E. Sullivan— Convicted before the municipal court of said county, October 26, 1870, on charge of vagrancy, and sentenced to imprisonment in the House of Correction for sixty days. Pardon granted November 12, 1870, on recommendation of judge of municipal court, district attorney, and inspector of the House of Correction, because of the tender age of the boys. Their health is such as to require paternal care. The inspector was of the opinion that the boys were “too young to be confined in an institution like the one under bis charge.”
9. RAM.sey White— Xonvicted before the municipal court of Milwaukee courty, Nov. 23d, 1870, on charge of vagrancy, and sentenced to imprisonment in said house for ninety days, at hard labor. Pardon granted Dec. 8, 1870, on recommendation of Municipal Judge and other promi nent citizens. The prisoner is a boy of 16 years of age. He had disobeyed his mother, and she inade a complaint against him to awe him into obedience. The penalty imposed was greater than she intended. The inspector certified to his good conduct in prison. Pardon granted by Lieutenant-Governor Pound. * From State Prison. 1. Silas C. CLARK– Convicted before the circuit court of Jackson county, at the March term, in 1869, of assault with a dangerous weapon and robbery, and sentenced to three years imprisonment in State prison. Pardon granted March 15, 1870, on the recommendation of a large number of citizens of said county, the judge before whom trial was had and the district attorney who prosecuted. The judge says: “It was a clear case of robbery, but in my judgment the evidence fell short of supporting the charge of intention to kill, if resisted, and if a motion for a new trial had been made I think I must have granted it on this ground. There was no evidence of any premeditated or previous design of doing wrong, and the whole transaction seems to be rather the result of a boyish drunken spree than of a conspiracy or orevious wicked intent. If the verdict had been for simple robbery, as I think it should have been, he would have been sentenced for one year. Clark has always been accounted a hard working, harmless, sound man, and this seems to have been his first offense. >k + :k >k + >k But I will say this, that hearing the trial and knowing what I do of the case, in my opinion the interests of criminal justice would not be ignored, but either promoted by an exercise of the pardoning power in this case after he has remained one full year.” From the evidence on file in this department, it seems very evident that justice requires that pardon should be granted, as it was, at the expiration of one year's imprisonment.
2. ANton Vogel—
Convicted before the circuit court of Washington county, October 26, 1867, of the crime of burning a warehouse, and sentenced to imprisonment in the State prison for four years. Pardon granted March 31 1870. A large number of citizens of the locality where the offence was committed, eight of the jury who found the verdict, and the district attorney, join in recommending the same. The railroad company, whose property was destroyed, asks for pardon, all for the reason that the crime was committed during a time of intense excitement, growing out of the alleged wrongs of the farm mortgagors committed by the railroad company. The excitement has passed away, the wrongs have been righted as far as possible by the present company, and it is believed by the law officers and all directly interested that Vogel's punishment has been ample to satisfy public justice and that executive clemency in this case would have a good, rather than a bad effect upon society in the section of the State woere he resides.
3. Edward D.Awson— Convicted before the circuit court of Milwaukee county, January 17, 1857, of the crime of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to imprisonment in the state prisen for life. Pardon granted May 11:., 1870, on the petition of the prisoner and the statements and recommendations of Judge Mallory, Judge Arthur McArthur, the prison officers and many other worthy citizens of this State. From the papers on file in the case in the executive office, it is clear that the evidence of his having rurdered Miargaret Higgins, as alleged, is wholly circ;mstantial, and such as left grave doubts of his guilt upon the minds of those who were familiar with the case, and subsequent events have greatly strengthened such doubts. One of the most material witnesses for the prosecution, Mrs. Simmons, is alleged to have stated, on her deathbed, that she testified falsely against Dawson, to shield the guilty party, who was dead at the time of such confession. This significant circumstance, the prisoner's acknowledged good character prior to the murder, the absence of any motive to commit the crime, his subsequent good behavior imprison, as certified by all the officers who since his confinement have had him in charge, all tend to confirm the doubt which arises from a careful review of the testimony. He was imprisoned about thirteen and a half years, and during that time labored constantly, willingly and well. At the conflagration of the shops he was especially distinguished for his heroism, risking his life at a narrow hazard to prevent an explosion, which but for his efforts and daring would have occurred, occasioning great loss of life among citizens, officers and prisoners. In view of the foregoing, the pardon was granted as the
demand of justice and humanity. Granted by Lieutenant Governor Pound.
4. JAMEs K. LUM–
Con, icted before the circuit court of Grant county, March 21, 1870, of the crime of polygamy, and sentended to imprisonment in the state prison for two years. Pardon granted September 3, 1870, upon recommendation of Judge J. T. Mills, who tried him, the district attorney, and many other worthy citizens of Grant county. It appears from their statements that he was not inte tionally guilty of the crime, and did not fully understand the legal effect of his act in marrying the second time. He had borne an excellent reputation until family troubles led him into the act for which he suffers the penalty,
ReCAPITULATION. From county jails. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 From House of Correction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ‘. . . . . . . . . . . . 9 From State Prison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Whole number granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
MESSAGE FROM THE ASSEMBLY. By E. W. Young, Chief Clerk thereof.
I am directed to inform you that the Assembly has adopted, and asks the concurrence of the Senate in
Jt. Res. No. 4, A.,
Relative to taxation by tariff; and,