WHO SAYS OTHERWISE?
Frank's attorneys, have said otherwise;
hired hack-writers, have said otherwise; a
corrupt detective agency, has said otherwise;
blinded Hebrews who ignore the evidence,
have said otherwise: and honest people who
knew nothing about the case, except what they
have learned from these untrustworthy
sources, have said otherwise.
In this tempest of opinion, what is the
anchor?
IT IS THE LAW, AS LAID DOWN BY
THE COURTS.
Is Commissioner Bob Davison a court,
vested with judicial powers?
Is Governor Jack Slaton a court, robed in
the ermine of the judiciary?
Indeed, No!
The Constitution of the State not only com
mands that the executive department shall
forever be kept separate from the judicial,
but expressly prohibits those officers who hold
executive positions from exercising judicial
functions.
Governor Slaton is the Chief of the Execu
tive Department; the Prison Commissioners
are his subordinate officers in that depart
ment.
But if the Prison Commission should un
dertake to go behind the decision of the Su
preme Court, and to retry this case on its
merits as disclosed by the official record, they
would usurp judicial power, and violate the
Constitution.
They have no more right to re-try the case
on the record, than they have to re-try it by
hearing witnesses.
If Governor Slaton should undertake to go
behind the decision of the Supreme Court,
and to retry the issue of guilt or innocence,
he will usurp judicial functions, and violate
the laws he swore to observe.
The pardoning power is his. but that is
entirely distinct from the judicial power to
try.
