Hang 'em high or let 'em go. Justice at the Philadelphia Mint
RogerB
Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭
Here is one example of Officers of the Mint preferring reimbursement to criminal prosecution of a thief. Evidently, the perpetrator was liked by his supervisors and not considered a hardened criminal. Following Patterson's signature are two annotations relating to the outcome. [The original letter is in NARA RG104 E-3 Correspondence Journals to 1837\Journal 1793-1824.]
"Mint, U.S.
April 4, 1823
James Monroe
President of the United States
Sir:
On the 25th of November last, one of the workingmen in the Mint (Benjamin Lenderbach), was detected in embezzling a few pieces of silver coin he was employed in striking, and in consequence, was committed, by the District Attorney, to prison where he yet remains, and awaiting his trial, which is to take place about the 11th of this month.
This offense is, by an Act of Congress, passed the 2nd of April 1792, declared to be felony, and punishable with death.
The above unhappy person is a young man, with a wife and two children, of reputable connexions [sic] in this city, and had been employed in the Mint about five years, without any thing being known to the officers derogatory to this character. It is believed, Sir, both by the District Attorney and the Officers of the Mint, that none of the ends of public justice would be impaired by a nolle prosequi, arising from this situation; but it is our earnest and humble request that you would have the goodness to signify to the District Attorney, that this [measure] would meet with your approbation.
I have the honor to be, Sir, in behalf of the Officers of the Mint ,
with the greatest respect and esteem,
your most obedient servant.
Robert Patterson
In consequence of the above, the District Attorney received from the Secretary of State, on the 14th of this month, after the grand jury had presented a bill, a letter signifying that the President approved of the measure recommended; and the prisoner was set at liberty.
N.B. Benjamin Lenderbach being set at liberty, Adam Eckfeldt received from the family of the said Lenderbach $250, and from himself, of wages due him at the time of his commitment, $20 making $270; which same B. Lenderbach had said, his friends would pay to A. Eckfeldt, towards the losses that he had sustained by the said Lenderbach’s frequent embezzlements, out of this sum, however A. Eckfeldt had paid upwards of $15 for contingent expenses."
Comments
Interesting view of the justice system in 1823. Thanks for posting.
Punishable by death? Wow. That would be a strong deterrent to bad behavior!
I’m not condoning that, but methinks our current form of delayed justice and relative lenience does little to deter many would-be criminals.
Evidently, neither did the death threat.
The death penalty does seem a bit extreme for this violation... especially since today, even murder rarely gets the death penalty. Our justice system has deteriorated into a mockery - IMO. I am glad that this individual was not terminated for his transgressions. I do wish for a more stringent justice system to deal with today's criminal culture. Cheers, RickO
I guess the glove didn't fit.:)
Notice that the letter was addressed to the President - evidently it had to go to the top for a decision. Seems very unusual.
Like Ron White says, "You can't fix stupid."
In 1823 few communities were too large for locals and law enforcement not to be aware of the "bad guys." The request for nolle prosequi was based on the accused prior actions and his family. He had already spend months in jail before an indictment was brought. Community connections meant that the kind of criminal defense we see today, in a much more anonymous society, was unlikely for small crimes and probably less successful for very serious crimes.
And so it began
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
Until the fall of 1825 the mint director dealt directly with the president,
depending on the situation, but this was changed by John Quincy Adams.
After that the director was not permitted to address the chief executive
directly except in emergency situations; communications after 1825 went
through the Treasury. It was at this point that the Mint ceased to be an
independent agency and became a part of the Treasury,
Thanks! Excellent point of detail. We often forget how differently things operated 200 years ago.
Great post OP. Thanks!