William K. Reed.

District of Colum- | Murder bia.

To be hanged Aug. | May 3, 1899 | On Sept. 4, 1898, the prisoner, Wil- | 4, 1899.

Sentence com- July 25 muted to imprisonment for life.

July 25

Name.

List of pardons granted by the President during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1900-Continued.

William K. Reed.

District of Colum- Murder bia.

To be hanged Aug. May 3, 1899 4, 1899.

is now an insane inmate of an
asylum. Undoubtedly the pris-
oner has an hereditary tendency
to unsound mind, and his facul-
ties are undoubtedly to some de-
gree unbalanced. It was proven,
however, on the part of the Gov-
ernment that Reed was able to
pursue his work as a carpenter in
a satisfactory way, and that in his
ordinary conduct and conversa-
tion he exhibited no evidences of
unsourd mind. While, as before
stated, he was unquestionably, in
the contemplation of law, respon-
sible as a sane person for his
crime and was properly con-
victed of murder, yet, in admin-
istering punishment for an of-
fense of this kind, it is proper to
take into consideration mental
tendencies and characteristics of
temperament which affect the
ability of the convict to restrain
his conduct within lawful limits
and to appreciate with adequacy
the mandates of the law. The
prisoner, in my judgment, is en-
titled to some mitigation of the
extreme punishment fixed by
statute for this offense. A rea-
sonable degree of tenderness for
mental and moral deficiency
caused by disease of the mind can
properly be exercised in cases of
this nature. It appears that some
such considerations as these must
have been in the minds of the
jury, because their verdict was
accompanied with a recommen-
dation to mercy. Under the law
no force or effect could be given
to such a recommendation except

Sentence com-
muted to im-
prisonment
for life.

by Executive clemency, and it is
to be assumed that the opinion of
the jurors was that some mitiga-
tion of the extreme penalty of
the law might properly be inter-
posed, and was, perhaps, called
for under the evidence. The
question is what this mitigation
should be. I do not think it
should be less than imprisonment
for life. It has been represented
to me that imprisonment for a
term of 10 or 15 years would be
adequate under the circum-
stances. 1 do not think so. The
violent tendencies of the prisoner
on this and other occasions, as
demonstrated by the evidence,
and the enormity of his offense,
call for his perpetual restraint
for the remainder of his life. I
therefore recommend that the
sentence of death be commuted
to life imprisonment.
Prisoner was sentenced July 20,
1897, to 2 years' imprisonment.
Appellate proceedings stayed the
execution of the sentence until
June 1, 1899, but in the meantime
prisoner was kept in jail at Mus-
cogee. As the proceedings on ap-
peal appear to have been taken in
good faith and not for delay, I con-
cur with the judge and district
attorney in thinking he should
have his time in jail count for
him. I therefore advise that
upon payment of the fine and
costs sentence be commuted to
expire Aug. 11, 1899.

On the 5th of July, instant, Dr. F.
A. Wagenhals, physician of the
Ohio penitentiary, reported the
condition of John Jamison as fol-
lows: "He is in the last stages of
consumption and can not possibly
live but a few months." Again
on the 10th instant the assistant
physician to the penitentiary re-
ported as follows: "For his phys-

Name.

List of pardons granted by the President during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1900-Continued.

District.

Offense.

Sentence.

Larceny of a horse. 5 years in United May 6, 1898 Petitioner, a youth of 17 or 18 years, Granted

2 years in United Nov. 3, 1898 Petitioner is recommended for a

3 months in county June 12, 1899 Petitioner was convicted of remov

jail at Frankfort

and $200 fine.

ing distilled spirits in violation of
sec. 3257, R. S. The minimum pun-
ishment for this is 3 months' im-
prisonment and a fine of $200,
which the court imposed. The
trial judge and district attorney
report that Brown, while techni-
cally guilty, did not willfully vio-
late the law, and recommend that
he be pardoned. I so advise.

I advise a pardon in this case be-
cause of prisoner's ill health.
The petitioner plead guilty to an
indictment for mailing an obscene
letter and was sentenced to im-
prisonment for 1 year, of which
time he has served 4 months.
It appears from the report of the
district attorney that the letter
was written in response to one
received by the prisoner, which
contained matter of great provo-
cation, to which he replied in the
heat of his passion, without hav-
ing in mind the fact that the
transmission of such matter
through the mails was criminal.
The defendant is not an habitual
lawbreaker, and does not appear
to have been before guilty of this
or any other offense against the
laws. I think he has been suffi-
ciently punished, and that the
mitigating circumstances re-
ported by the district attorney
entitle him to a pardon, and I so
recommend.

The prisoner was sentenced to 6
months' imprisonment for buy-
ing cattle of Indians without per-
mission from the agent in charge.
This was the minimum sentence
allowed by the statute. The dis-
trict attorney reports that the