Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 37, Number 102, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 4 August 1905 — About The Donahue Case. [ARTICLE]

About The Donahue Case.

A much esteemed citizen Everett Halstead sends an article on the Donahue case of whioh the following is the first page. Donahue does not haDg. This does not mean to at be is turned free. Sentence of death has only been changed to a prison life. I notice a few newspapers are critioiog the action of Gov. Hanly for making this change. Gov. Hanly is not a rash man. He makes the statement that Donahue did not have a fair trial. Gov, Hanly would never have made this statement had he not oarefully investigated long enough to know what he was talking abont Indiana shou'd be prond to know that she now has a Governor that is doing all in his power to en foroe her laws Donahue may ha a miserable degraded murderer. Bat the basest and meanest is entitled to a fair trial. EvfiRTT Haestead.

The remainder of Mr. Halstead’s letter is a resume of the celebrated Durant case in San Francisco, wherr Durant, a medical student, was hanged on circumstantial evidence, for the murder of two young girls in a churob, and of which crime the pastor of the ohuroh is said after to have ooufossed his guilt, on his death bed.

We can not see that instance applies in the Donahue case at all unless Mr, Halstead takes the view that no parsoas should suffer death on circumstantial evidence, whioh if he does would be almost wholly equivalent to abolishing the death penalty altogether. Which view Gov, Hanly and many other estimable people take, and perhaps Mr. Hals'ead among the number. We believe it is a mistaken view, but the subjeot is too large for us to oare to undertake its discussion.

We quite agree with Mr. Halstead in rej aicirg that Gov. Hanly is trying to enforce the law, however much we disagree with him in regard to the Governor’s action in the Donahne case. We followed that Donahue trial carefully, as it was reported at great length in the Hammond and Crown Point paper and we believed then and still believe that he had a perfeotly fair trial, and the Supreme Coart whioh is fu’ly as oapable to judge of snch matters as Gov. Hanly, and no donbt examined the oase much more thoroughly, believed the same thing. The Supreme Court eaid there was no merit in the claim that Donahue’s sanity should have been questiored into farther, and regarding Ihe Governor’s other point, that Donahue’s principal attorney was not brought iato the case until a day or two before the trial, we have the positive assertion to the contrary of that most careful and oouseivative of papers the Oiown Point Star, which says: Governor Hanly’s excuse for oommutiug Donahue’s sentence was that oue of his attorneys, T. S. Fancher was not called into the oase until the morning cf the trial when in fiot he was engaged five weeks before and bad put iu all the time he saw any nee for. Those are his own words for it.