Viewing page 282 of 309

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

with the authorities of the Bureau in ascertaining the facts of any individual case, and wherever reasonable cause can be shown why Executive Leniency should be exercised it will be freely and cheerfully extended.  But these facts must come from officers of the Courts where the parties were tried, or from citizens of respectability who are acquainted with the previous character of the convicts.

I would say further, that it is not the value or amount of the article stolen always that should influence interference in the cases.  If the offender was of reasonable good character and habits previous to conviction then it should have due weight, but if such character had been bad and vicious it should [[strikethrough]] not [[/strikethrough]] be disregarded.

It is certainly a novel proceeding, and I cannot believe it is justifiable that an application of this character should be based upon the statements of the convicts.  The course pursued by the Inspector in raising in the minds of the convicts an expectation of release, is in my candid judgment, reprehensible and cannot fail to prove mischievous.  And were I to release them would prove of the greatest injury to them.  It would be regarded as a license and be an incentive to them to commit other offences.  I trust in the future the Chief of the Bureau will permit no further interference of this kind with the municipal and police regulations of this state.  I must be allowed also to remark that the statements and implied censures of Inspector St Clair towards the Courts people and authorities of this state are neither