I have no doubt of the right of the State to put persons to death, who by their own deliberate criminal acts make that course necessary for the public safety, nor do I question the existence of the right to inflict the death penalty as a punishment for crime; but I am quite as decided in the conviction that that mode of punishment has but little influence to deter from the commission of crime, and that on the other hand it is a worn-out vestige of barbarism, that hardens and depraves the people.

Deliberate homicide by public authority has much greater influence to weaken respect for human life than the commission of murder by lawless persons, and it is remarkable that the ecclesiastical bodies, and that portion of the so-called religious and the secular press that demand the more frequent infiiction of death by judicial sentence, concede the whole point in dispute, when, impressed with the horrible and depraving influence of public executions, they insist upon the necessity of excluding those from the spectacle who are to be instructed and impressed by the example. It may be true that there are classes of persons who can only be restrained from the commission of crimes by the fear of death. There may be communities in which the example of the infliction of the death penalty would be productive of benefit, and it may also be true that monsters of crime may sometimes be found whose extermination is demanded, not to vindicate the authority of law, but the dignity of human nature. It would not therefore be judicious for the State to renounce the power to inflict death, but the propriety of the exercise of the power in any instance can best be determined by a jury drawn from the body of the people. And it may be proper for me to make some allusion to the probable influence of the exercise of the pardoning power by the Governor upon the administration of the criminal laws.

The executive authority to grant pardons, reprieves and commutations, is, under the Constitution, absolute, and to be exercised by him at his discretion, and like all discretionary powers confided to public officers, is extremely liable to abuse.

I have exercised the pardoning power, in proportion to the whole number of convictions in the State, more sparingly than any of my predecessors, and I am satisfied that I have done so in improper cases. But I have had the satisfaction of releasing persons from the Penitentiary after they had furnished to me the most unquestionable proof of their innocence of the alleged crimes of which the jury had found them guilty; I have, by pardon, shortened terms of imprisonment that were certified to me by the judges and juries imposing them to be excessive; and I have in more than one instance interfered for the relief of the poor and ignorant who were the victims of the arts of designing persons.

We know that the blindness of legal justice is but a fable, and that though the laws, in their letter and spirit, are just and humane, and equal, as a practical fact the wealthy and influential do disregard or violate them with a measure of impunity not permitted to the poor and friendless. We know, too, that the jails into which those who are accused of the commission of crimes, and are unable to furnish bail, are crowded, are moral pest houses, where vice is taught to the innocent, and the guilty made more depraved. We know that instances are not wanting in which jailers or their subordinates, alone or in conjunction with some of a class of professional men who dishonor the law and dis

grace the courts that tolerate their presence, have deprived friendless prisoners of all they possess, and have then delivered them over to a certain conviction, their sentences of imprisonment aggravated and lengthened by the vile character of their counsel, who first robbed and then betrayed them. I have pardoned some of this class of unfortunates upon the ground that if the State cannot protect them it ought to make them the reparation of forgiveness.

No subject is more worthy of the attention of the representatives of an enlightened Christian people than the imperfect provision made by the laws of the State for the protection of the rights of the poor, the ignorant, the inexperienced and the friendless, in the criminal courts. The evil is most apparent in the cities and populous counties of the State. Every year the population of the State is increased by emigrants from all the nations of Europe, and from every State of the Union, who are of every grade of character and every degree of intelligence. Of the thousands that come into the State, many are ignorant of our language and our laws, and many are upon their arrival poor and often ill, dispirited and inexperienced. In the cities the missionaries of vice are ever active, and its temples are always open, and from their doors none are driven away; to these the inexperienced and unwary are often tempted to resort, or from want of employment the irresolute are impelled to the commission of crime, or often they are made the dupes and instruments of those with whom crime is a trade, or, being strangers and friendless, they are readily suspected, and when arrested they are unable to find bail and are committed to jail, and if indicted, the judge, however humane and considerate, is compelled to entrust their defence to some lawyer without standing or experience in his profession, and a conviction follows, for there is no one to demand justice or implore mercy. It is time that the practice of delivering the living bodies of poor prisoners to legal students for professional instruction was abandoned, and I insist that provision should be made by law for the election or appointment, in the large cities and populous counties of the State, of suitable persons whose duty it should be to visit the places where persons are confined upon criminal charges, confer with and advise poor prisoners, protect them from oppressions and extortions, attend examinations, investigate the charges against them, advise with injured parties, and the court and State's attorney, with a view to the dismissal of prosecutions where the ends of justice would by that course be promoted, or with reference to the proper measure of punishment in cases where the punishment is discretionary with the judge, or in proper cases alone, or in conjunction with the counsel assigned by the court, manage their defense. A proposition to provide for the appointment of an officer to watch the administration of the laws from the standpoint of those who are accused of crimes is novel, but every one familiar with the administration of the criminal laws of the State, is fully aware of the fact that a truthful statement of all the wrongs inflicted upon persons charged with offences would prove that many crimes have been committed in the name of the law.

RAILROADS.

An important exception to the general disposition to obey the laws, which prevails throughout the State, is found in the refusal of common carriers of passengers and freights by railways to obey the constitutional and legal enactments provided for the regulation of that import

ant interest, and the people of the State, aware of the refusal of this class of persons to obey the laws, and of the mischiefs their contempt of the authority of the State produces, look to the General Assembly to make further and efficient efforts to provide a remedy.

The report of the Railroad and Warehouse Commissioners, which is now in the hands of the printer, and will be laid before the General Assembly as early as possible, will contain full information as to the pretensions of the railway managers, and of the efforts made by the Commissioners to enforce the authority of the State over them.

Successful resistance to the Constitution and laws of the State subverts them. It can make no difference whether such resistance is made by physical means too powerful to be overcome, or by combinations of financial interests that merely treat the laws with contempt, and refuse to obey them. The effects of successful physical resistance are immediate and easily perceived, while those produced by persistent and contemptuous disobedience are remote, and may not at once appear, but they silently sap and weaken the foundations of public order, and in the end destroy.

The issue made with the State, by the distinct refusal of the managers of railways to obey the laws enacted by the General Assembly for the correction of abuses, and to prevent unjust discriminations and extor tions, is one of power. It is not pretended that in the enactment of the laws disobeyed the General Assembly transcended the authority vested in the Legislature; for by the terms of the Constitution it is made the duty of the General Assembly, from time to time, to pass laws establishing reasonable maximum rates of charges for the transportation of passengers and freights on the different railroads of the State, and to pass laws to correct abuses and to prevent unjust discriminations and extortions in the rates of freight and passenger tariffs on the different railroads of the State; and by another provision of the Constitution, railroads heretofore constructed, or that may hereafter be constructed in this State, are declared to be public highways, and free to all persons for the transportation of their persons and property thereon, as may be prescribed by law.

In opposition to these distinct provisions of the State Constitution, and the laws enacted in pursuance of them, the railroad corporations deny their obligation to obey, and openly persist in refusing to conform to the maximum rates allowed by the acts of the General Assembly, for the transportation of passengers and freights on their lines; and they continue to practice the abuses and enforce the unjust discriminations and extortions forbidden by the laws; and they continue, notwithstanding the legislative prohibition, to assert their right to fix their ratio for the transportation of passengers and freights on their roads, and to establish discriminations at their pleasure; and they deny the authority of the State to interfere for the regulation of the one or the prohibition of the other.

It is perhaps but just that it should be stated that it is sometimes conceded by those who manage the interests of the railway corporations that as carriers they are in some way, or to some extent, bound to conform to the principle of reasonableness in their charges; and on some occasions some of them are understood to have assented to the proposition, which seemed to be correct under the Constitution of 1848, that reasonableness is the limit of railroad rates for transportation, and the question of what are reasonable rates is to be settled by the courts when particular charges are disputed.

But the General Assembly, by the act of April 7, 1871, which was enacted to prevent unjust discriminations and extortions in the rates to be charged for the transportations of freights, fixed certain rules for the determination of the rates permitted to be charged by the railways in this State, declared all rules and regulations and by-laws of any railroad corporation that fixed, prescribed or established any greater toll or compensation than the rates permitted by the act, to be void, provided penalties for the violation of the provisions of the act, and then declared any willful violation of any of the acts to be a forfeiture of its franchises, and by the act of April 15, 1871, the maximum rates allowed to be charged by railways for the transportation of passengers was fixed, and provision made for the enforcement of the act.

Repeating expressions employed before, it seems to me to be due to the interests of the people of the State, and to the dignity and authority of its Constitution and laws, that the most energetic and decisive measures should be devised and adopted by the General Assembly, to limit the pretensions of this rapidly growing and all absorbing interest and to compel its obedience. In this view it is essential that all the offenses committed by the railway corporations should be prosecuted by indictment preferred by the grand juries, and tried by juries of the proper vicinage. One of the acts now in force, provides that State's attorneys may prosecute; the other that he shall prosecute for forfeitures after the almost impossible event of the fifth conviction; but State's attor neys will not be likely to desire to encounter this formidable interest with no other support than the consciousness of having discharged duties. I therefore recommend that the fourth section of the act of April 7th, 1871, be amended so as to make the penalties provided by that section recoverable by indictment against the corporations and its employees, and that the fifth section be amended so as to make it the duty of the Attorney-General to prosecute railway companies for violations of the law, and that similar alterations be made in the act of April 15th, 1871.

But it seems to me that the real causes of the manifold abuses, extortions and oppressions to which the people are subjected are to be found in the fact that railroad property has passed under the control of combinations of financial adventurers who are in nowise interested in the proper management of the roads.

This condition of the management of railroads may be accounted for by referring it in part to the great increase of the speculative wealth of the country; the tendency everywhere, in every business, to organization; and the circumstance, so unfortunate for the people, that the General Assembly did not, in the enactment of the special and general laws authorizing the creation of railroad corporations, expressly reserve such sufficient power to regulate and control their internal management as would insure the protection of the interests of the body of the stockholders and the public.

The enormous system of internal improvements undertaken by the State in its early history, proves that the people even then perceived the usefulness of railways, and their willingness to make large sacrifices to secure to themselves their advantages; and since the failure of that system, no State has made greater efforts, by liberal acts of incorporation to private adventures, grants of the right of way for railroads previously acquired by the State, gratuities in money and lands, and loans of credit by counties and other public and municipal bodies, to se

cure the construction of railroads, than has Illinois, and the citizens of the State have, with the most liberal spirit and by every means in their power, aided in the development of the railway system to its present proportions.

The State of Illinois contains within its limits more than six thousand miles of railroad; they penetrate almost every county. And the railroads of this State, by their legal connections, and the identity of their interests and purposes with those of other States, have become a part of a system that it is said embraces sixty thousand miles of railroads in the United States, and which is being extended to limits that do not admit of easy definition.

The railroad and carrying interests control a larger amount of capital than any other in the United States, and by means of their capital, and their intimate relations with all other business pursuits, extending too, as railroads do, to all parts of the country, they exercise a greater measure of influence than was ever before, in any country, in the hands of individuals. The iron rail, the steam engine and the telegraph, all now in substantial co-operation, already control the commerce of the continent, and to a large extent influence the value of every product of industry and the profits of every business pursuit. They build up favored cities, and depress their rivals; they have diminished the value of the great rivers as highways of commerce; and the shipping of the lakes, and that engaged in coastwise trade, embarrassed by obstacles that the engine upon the iron rail defies, maintain with the new agencies but a feeble and struggling competition. From the superiority of this new method of transportation in speed, in safety and power, all other modes are rendered comparatively useless, and the country is brought to face the fact that in this age of remarkable commercial and intellectual activity the only available lines of intercourse and trade on the continent are under the control of private individuals, who assert for themselves the power and the right to impose burdens upon the intercourse and commerce of the country to an extent to which they acknowledge no definite limits, nor, in the exercise of the discretion they claim as to the amounts they may impose, do they admit themselves to be bound to conform to any rule of equality, but they maintain their right to discriminate between different points on their own lines between different individuals engaged in the same business at the same points, and to increase and reduce their rates at pleasure, until to the ordinary hazards of business is added the uncertain fluctuations dependent upon the management of railways.

In my judgment the existing laws, intended to regulate the duties and define the obligations of common carriers by railway, will not accomplish the object desired, for the reason, amongst others, that they are to a certain extent based upon the wide spread misconception of the true relation of that class of public agents to the people, and, as a consequence of that misconception, the regulations for the government of the owners and managers of railway lines are confused and weakened by assuming that the ownership and management of railway lines and the receipt, transportation and delivery of passengers and freights for hire, which constitutes the business of a common carrier, are so inseparable that they are necessarily parts of the same general business, while, in the nature of things, and from the force of practices that now extensively prevail on many lines of railway, they are certainly different pursuits; and regula