Page:Special message of the governor of Iowa to the seventeenth General assembly, communicating report of pardons and remissions (IA specialmessageof00iowa).pdf/18

16 he was a citizen of Muscatine, and previous to the commission of this offense; that his standing was good and he had the respect of all who knew him. He was gentlemanly in all his deportment to those with whom he had business.” The warden says, “His conduct in the prison has been excellent. He has cheerfully conformed to all the rules and regulations of the prison.”

September 19. Crime, larceny; sentence, Penitentiary for three years. Convicted at the November term, 1875, of the district court of Marshall county. Committed to the Penitentiary of the State December 4, 1875. Those requesting his pardon represent that he is very sick and has been so since his imprisonment began. The penitentiary physician says, “Clark has consumption; that he is growing weaker every day; and that if he remains in the penitentiary his case will terminate fatally; but that there is a great chance for prolongation of his life outside of the prison.” The pardon is conditional: Said Clark is in no case (during the term for which he was sentenced) to become a county charge, and the stipulations of a bond entered into by Joseph and Edward Clark, binding themselves in the penal sum of two hundred and fifty dollars, of date September 14, 1877, to hold the State of Iowa and the county of Mahaska harmless from all costs and expenses in keeping and caring for said Clark so long as he shall need aid, shall be fully complied with.

October 2. Crime, manslaughter. Sentence, imprisonment in the Additional Penitentiary for six years. Convicted at the September term, 1875, of the district court of Tama county. Committed October 2, 1875. Pardoned on recommendation of the judge and district-attorney who tried the case; also, on a petition signed by one hundred and twenty citizens of Tama county, which includes the names of the county officers and a majority of the attorneys of Tama county. The charge was for shooting and killing one Gus Young. The petitioners say, “We have always been and still are convinced that said Mahany did not intend to shoot Young, or any one else, but was careless in handling the pistol and accidentally killed Young.” Considering the doubt as to intentional criminality, and that he had previously borne a fair reputation, and that during his imprisonment his conduct has been excellent, pardon is granted, on condition that he abstain from the use of intoxicating liquors, in which he formerly indulged.