Econlib

The Library

Other Sites

 Front Page arrow Titles (by Subject) arrow JAY TO THE JUSTICES AND SELECTMEN OF THE TOWN OF NORWALK, CONN. - The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, vol. 4 (1794-1826)

Return to Title Page for The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, vol. 4 (1794-1826)

Search this Title:

Also in the Library:

Subject Area: Political Theory
Topic: The American Revolution and Constitution

JAY TO THE JUSTICES AND SELECTMEN OF THE TOWN OF NORWALK, CONN. - John Jay, The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, vol. 4 (1794-1826) [1893]

Edition used:

The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, ed. Henry P. Johnston, A.M. (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1890-93). Vol. 4 (1794-1826).

Part of: The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, 4 vols.

About Liberty Fund:

Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.


JAY TO THE JUSTICES AND SELECTMEN OF THE TOWN OF NORWALK, CONN.

New York, 2d July, 1798.

Gentlemen:

I have received the petition by which you and other inhabitants of the town of Norwalk request that a pardon may be granted to Stephen Belknap, who was lately convicted of attempting, in concert with other prisoners, to effect their escape from the jail of this city by force of arms. The jail of the city was broken, the citizens alarmed, one of them was shot and severely wounded, and the lives of others of them greatly endangered. For this offence he was sentenced to imprisonment and hard labour in the state-prison for eighteen months, and to a fine of no great amount.

This correct and well-written petition appears to have been dictated by pure and commendable motives. From the characters of the subscribers I am convinced that entire credit is due to the facts stated in it, and that the reputation, circumstances, and connections of Stephen Belknap are truly represented.

I feel the force of the considerations you urge, and sincerely sympathize with the young man’s father in the affliction which he must necessarily experience from so distressing an event.

It is true that I have authority to grant him a pardon; but that authority, you well know, gentlemen, is to be considered as a trust to be executed, not according to my will and inclination, but with sound discretion, and on principles which reconcile mercy to offenders, with the interests of the public.

In free states the laws alone bear rule; and, to that end, respect for and obedience to them is indispensable to the order, comfort, and security of society. Belknap’s offence includes disrespect to the laws, opposition and defiance to their authority, and a most unjustifiable combination to break from their control by force of arms, and without regard to the blood and lives of faithful officers and innocent citizens.

The punishment to which he has been adjudged is mild, and they who visit the state-prison will find that he has nothing but his confinement to complain of. After having very maturely considered this case, it appears to me that the nature of his offence is such as that a pardon would not be a prudent or a seasonable measure. The civil magistrates and ministers of justice must be protected, and that so decidedly as to let it be seen and felt, that violences and outrages against them cannot be committed with impunity. To pardon and discharge such an offender almost directly after his commitment to the state-prison would, instead of producing the proper impressions on him and others, naturally excite disgust and indignation in the peace-officers, and be censured, if not generally, at least by those who think our present penal code too mild. Besides, should a pardon be granted to Belknap and refused to his fellow-offenders, it would be difficult so to discriminate him from all the others as to avoid that partiality and respect to persons which both justice and policy forbid. Although too much severity is inhumanity, yet unless mercy is extended with great discretion, it will encourage offences and ultimately multiply punishments.

It also merits consideration, that many judicious and well-disposed citizens among us think that more sanguine expectations are entertained from our present mild or (as some call it) relaxed system of punishments, than will ever be realized. Prudence directs that it should have a fair trial, and therefore that the supposed objections to it should not be permitted to derive strength and support from the frequency of pardons, in cases where the propriety of them is justly liable to doubt and question.

I submit these reflections to your candid consideration; and I assure you that I sincerely regret their constraining me to forego the satisfaction I should derive from a compliance with your request.

It is pleasant to gratify those who wish us well, and whom we esteem and respect; but there are occasions when we must, however reluctantly, deny ourselves that pleasure.

I have the honour to be, gentlemen,
Your humble servant,

John Jay.