You asked for historical information about commutations of death sentences by the General Assembly.

The General Assembly exercised the power to commute death sentences until legislation granted the power to the Board of Pardons. We searched the 1943 Index of Special Laws and found that the General Assembly commuted at least seven death sentences between 1841 and 1871.

It appears that the process to approve a commutation involved (1) a petition for commutation submitted to the House or Senate, (2) referral of the petition to a joint select committee (or the Judiciary Committee in the case of Swift’s petition described below), (3) a report by the committee accompanied by a joint resolution, and (4) votes by both the House and Senate.

It is unclear from secondary sources whether these commutations required the governor’s approval. But we did find one example of a commutation vetoed by the governor in 1889.

In 1883, legislation created the Board of Pardons but the statute did not explicitly give the board the power to commute death sentences until 1889. During the 1889 session, the General Assembly considered petitions to commutate the death sentence of John H. Swift. Both Houses passed a resolution commuting his sentence but the governor vetoed it. The Senate approved the resolution over the governor’s veto but the House vote to override failed.

We found the following seven death sentence commutations by the General Assembly between 1841 and 1871.

1. 1841: John Burke was sentenced to death for murder. The General Assembly commuted his sentence to confinement in the Connecticut State Prison, to be kept at hard labor during his natural life. The resolution states the he petitioned for commutation because “the deceased was the aggressor by reproachful words and blows with her fist, and with a chair…” (1841 Special Acts, p. 10).

2. 1842: David Abbot. The General Assembly commuted his death sentence to imprisonment in the Connecticut State Prison “at such labor as shall be deemed most proper by the medical adviser of such institution, during his natural life” (1842 Special Acts, p. 8).

3. 1848: George Jackson. The General Assembly commuted his death sentence to imprisonment in the Connecticut State Prison during his natural life (1848 Special Acts, p. 56).

4. 1851: Benjamin S. Balcom. The General Assembly commuted his death sentence to imprisonment in the Connecticut State Prison, at hard labor, during his natural life (1851 Special Acts, p. 70).

5. 1851: William R. Calhoun. The General Assembly commuted his death sentence to imprisonment in the Connecticut State Prison, at hard labor, during his natural life (1851 Special Acts, p. 70).

6. 1851: Henry Menasseth. The General Assembly commuted his death sentence to imprisonment in the Connecticut State Prison, at hard labor, during his natural life (1851 Special Acts, p. 70).

7. 1871: Frederick Hall. The General Assembly commuted his death sentence for murder to imprisonment in the Connecticut State Prison during his natural life, at hard labor (1871 Special Acts, p. 192).

We found one example of a commutation vetoed by the governor.

In 1883, legislation created the Board of Pardons but the statute did not explicitly give the board the power to commute death sentences until 1889. During the 1889 session, the General Assembly considered petitions to commutate the death sentence of John H. Swift (Senate Petition No. 21 and House Petition No. 207).

The Judiciary Committee favorably reported a resolution to commute his sentence on March 21. In its report, the committee stated that the Board of Pardons should have the power to grant commutations, but it was of the opinion that neither the intention nor letter of the statute conferred this commutation power on the board.

The report discusses the law of homicide and the legal effect that intoxication has on an offender’s mental state. The committee stated that it conducted its investigation and was “unmoved by sympathy for the living or the dead. ” It heard testimony that the offender was addicted to the constant and excessive use of intoxicating liquors, he was intoxicated on the day of the murder, and he possibly suffered from delirium tremens. The report states that based on the evidence, some of which was not presented at trial, the “committee cannot divest themselves of the impression and belief that Swift, at the time he shot his wife, was on the verge of delirium tremens, and his mind so weakened and unsettled by the long-continued use of alcoholic drinks as to render him at the time of the homicide incapable of committing murder in the first degree” (House Journal, March 21, 1889, p. 449).

The resolution passed both the House and Senate. But Governor Morgan G. Bulkeley vetoed the resolution (SJR 149), stating, “Having given this case my deliberate thought and consideration, I have been unable to discover any new evidence presented since the trial, or any mitigating circumstances to justify legislative interference with the verdict of the jury and the sentence of the court…” (House Journal, April 9, 1889, p. 687).

The Senate voted to override the veto (April 5) but the House vote to override failed (April 9).

CR: ts