4. Schedule of data covering preliminary hearings of felony cases in the Municipal Court, 1919 and 1920. (Criminal Courts and Prosecution 5. Schedule of data respecting prisoners in the Workhouse, whose terms ended during January, February, March, July, August, and September, 1920. (Tables 3-7, Correctional and Penal Treatment report.) Name Nationality color sex. S APPENDIX III THE NORWOOD BILL ENATE Bill No. 8, of the Eighty-fourth General Assembly Regular Session, 1921, of Ohio Legislature, introduced by Senator Norwood, and which became a law without the Governor's approval: A BILL To amend section 2166 of the General Code, relative to indeterminate sentence to the Ohio Penitentiary. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF OHIO: Section 1. That section 2166 of the General Code be amended to read as follows: Sec. 2166. Courts imposing sentences to the Ohio penitentiary for felonies, except treason, and murder in the first degree, shall make them general, but they shall fix within the limits prescribed by law, a minimum period of duration of such sentences. All terms of imprisonment of persons in the Ohio penitentiary may be terminated by the Ohio board of clemency, as authorized by this chapter, but no such terms shall exceed the maximum term provided by law for the felony of which the prisoner was convicted, nor be less than the minimum term fixed by the court for such felony. If a prisoner is sentenced for two or more separate felonies, his term of imprisonment may equal, but shall not exceed, the aggregate of the maximum terms of all the felonies for which he was sentenced and, for the purposes of this chapter he shall be held to be serving one continuous term of imprisonment. If through oversight or otherwise, a sentence to the Ohio penitentiary should be for a definite term, it shall not thereby become void, but the person so sentenced shall be subject to the liabilities of this chapter and receive the benefits thereof, as if he had not been sentenced in the manner required by this section. Section 2. That said original section 2166 of the General Code and all laws or parts of laws inconsistent with this act be, and the same are hereby repealed. APPENDIX IV PARDONS IN OHIO A STUDY OF THE PARDONING POWER AS EXERCISED BY THE GOVERNORS OF OHIO, APPLYING TO THE STATE PENITENTIARY EDITOR'S NOTE-Most of the data for this report were gathered by Kosciusko Kitchen, of Logan, and C. J. Mueller, of Middletown, law students at Western Reserve University, who were interested in this phase of the Ohio penal system. The material was submitted to the Ohio Institute for Public Efficiency, Columbus, Ohio, which is responsible for the form of the report and the recommendations. The recommendations were written by R. E. Miles, director of the Institute. The data gathered relate only to pardons and commutations granted to inmates of the Ohio Penitentiary. As these constitute, however, over two-thirds of all pardons granted by the several governors, it is felt that the conclusions drawn may be considered substantiated. General data were gathered for the period July 1, 1899, to June 30, 1921, and detailed analysis of the records from January 11, 1915, to January 10, 1921. The latter period comprises the last three executive terms, previous to which time the records lack sufficient accuracy to make detailed study worth while. WHAT IS A PARDON? According to official records, there are eight recognized ways in which a prisoner at the Ohio Penitentiary may receive his liberty. These eight ways are as follows: Expiration of sentence Parole Full pardon Conditional pardon Commutation of sentence Conditional commutation of sentence Conditional release Final release Without stopping to discuss here how many of these classifications might be considered superfluous, a pardon is distinguished from the other methods of release in the fact that it effects a restoration of the rights and privileges of citizenship which are forfeited by conviction of a felony. Among these are the rights to be an elector or juror, or to hold an office of honor, trust, or profit.1 1 Ohio General Code, Sec. 12390. Where a general pardon has been granted, it obliterates the record of conviction, and offenses committed within its terms cannot be reconsidered for the purpose of sentencing one under the habitual criminal act.1 A commutation differs from a general pardon in that, while shortening the sentence, it does not obliterate the record of conviction. General rights of citizenship are restored. "The main reasons for investing the chief executives of modern nations with the wide discretion which they exercise in this regard are to prevent injustice because of the fallibility of human laws, which sometimes work injustice in individual cases, although they may be salutary on the whole; the possibility that a person may be unjustly accused and convicted, which may not be discovered until long afterward; to make it possible for the supreme authority to release persons convicted and sentenced under harsh and oppressive laws, especially political offenders convicted in a time of great public excitement and discord; to enable the chief executive to reward in this manner repentance and good conduct in prison, where he is satisfied that a thorough reform has been effected, and justice satisfied. The necessity for the exercise of this power on the ground last named is greatly lessened by statutes allowing a graduated commutation of a term of imprisonment as a reward for repentance and good conduct in prison." Another ground sometimes urged for the use of a pardon or commutation is the "occasional necessity of obtaining evidence from one wrongdoer to secure the conviction and punishment of another. In certain forms of crime, such as bribery and conspiracy, in which more than one person must be concerned, the precise facts usually lie in the knowledge of the guilty parties only, and it is often very difficult, sometimes quite impossible, to secure adequate proof against any, unless one of them can be induced to testify." THE GOVERNOR'S POWERS Under the provisions of the Ohio constitution, adopted in 1851, almost unlimited pardoning powers are conferred upon the Governor. Article III, Section 11, of the constitution says: He [the Governor shall have power, after conviction, to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons, for all crimes and offenses, except treason and cases of impeachment, upon such conditions as he may think proper; subject, however, 1 State v. Williams, 7 O.N.P. 562, 5 O.D.(N.P.) 545. 2 New International Encyclopedia. 'Charles J. Bonaparte, in Yale Law Journal, vol. 19, 1909-10, pp. 603-8. 1 to such regulations, as to the manner of applying for pardons, as may be prescribed by law. He shall communicate to the general assembly, at every regular session each case of reprieve, commutation, or pardon granted, stating the name and crime. of the convict, the sentence, its date, and the date of the commutation, pardon, or reprieve, with his reason therefor. The regular procedure for dealing with pardons, found in Sections 93-101 of the General Code, may be summarized as follows: Notice of application furnished to prosecuting attorney of proper county and published in newspaper, except in capital cases. Prosecuting attorney reports certain information to board of pardons. Governor grants or rejects application. Any or all of the foregoing provisions, however, may be dispensed with by the governor in case of apparent imminent danger of death or on recommendation of the warden and director of public welfare, with reason stated therefor. ORGANIZATION FOR HANDLING PARDONS It was not until 1888 that Ohio recognized the practical need of an organized personnel to review applications for, and the data bearing upon, pardon cases. A Board of Pardons, consisting of four members, was created, which functioned until 1917, when it was abolished and its duties and powers transferred to the Board of Clemency. Four years prior to the establishment of the Board of Pardons, however, a Board of Managers had been created to supervise the parole system. This board was abolished in 1911, and its functions were transferred to the Board of Administration, established in that year. From 1911 until 1917 the parole system was administered by the Board of Administration. During the three decades that followed the creation of the two organized personnels to administer the pardon and parole systems, respectively, no effort was made, apparently, to combine the work and avoid the duplication and overlapping of information and effort. In 1917, however, the Board of Clemency came into existence. It consisted of two members of opposite political faith, appointed by the governor from different appellate judicial districts. It was charged with the administration of pardons and paroles so far as they related to "penal" institutions (i. e., the penitentiary and the two reformatories). On July 1, 1921, the reorganization code abolished the Board of |