The national Republican., 1866-12-27
The Coures.
Ths Csurts. -FIf
SUPREME CoURr OF fHx UNrEp SrArIs-
Wrn.usnAv "

SUPREME CoURr OF fHE UNITED SrATks.-
wa,l~ R.S;siv~."2I Nissrssrs Rsysiiion
.-A,rsst smi Bsil-AyYsnra~es y tAs Dysrlanf-
Wiiiiam Waitv snd 8. r. Slater, Pisint1s in
Error, rs The United iStafa-Ths hero Of this
case, the "grsysysd nan Of ds.tiny,' has been
c Il: o% u. dsns
Walkers rsoogassncs forfeited for non. n.apPsarsncs
on the day 6xsd, whsn under arrest for setting on
foot his expedition agsinst the Territories Of Mica
ragua and Costa Rloa, Of familiar memory, 10 Just
70 ne q sns
esthsr with the history Of the procssdug' the case
L rendered Interesting.
Walker vas arrested under warrant Of the Dis.
triet Court at New Orleans, on the charge above
Of April 30, 1918, which declares such offence .
high nisdemsanor, punishable By nns not exceed.
ing thrss thousand dollsrs, and imphsopmsnt for
not more than three ysars He was brought Into
court Novsmbsr II, 1857, and entered into rscog.
nissues In the sum Of $4,000, with Slater - his
surety, subject to the usual conditions for his sp
psarsnes 10.
On the day mentioned In the rsoosnisanos, No.
vsmbsr 17th, following he failed 70 appear ia
court In person. but his attorney and counsel Pierre
Soul. claimed the right to represent and appear
was, however, denied, and upon motion Of the Dis
triet Attorney the rsooguisanes was declared for.
fsited and Judgment directed to be entered there.
on; and subsequently,, on the sth Of January, 1885,
ths eourt, sfter due proclamation, rendered judg.
nsnt against Walker and his surety, in soisdo for
a. ooo with interest thsrson at the rate Of sig per
cent. from date until paid. The judgment not hay.
Ing been signed, on Jsnuary 9th the counsel Of the
surety moved the court that the Judgment bs .us.
pended for thirty s,zs with Vie, TO the P,oduo.
eognissnos. the surety swearing that hs was posi-.
tive II could be Effected within thirty days.
This motion the court refused, and on the 18th
Of January signed the judgment. The motion was
denied on the ground that II was not shown that
the court, In violation Of the sxprsss terms Of bis
rsoognisancs.
The points made BY Mr.. souls against the de-
ciaration Of forfeiture, and judgment against the
surety, were, hrst that In cases Of mtsdeusenor
counsel a' for 4: s.i:nd:us' having spps.s.d. no
judgment Of forfeiture could legally BE- rendered;
and second, that until there be judgment for for
fsiturs entered up against the principal on the
rscognissnos, the surety cannot bs called upon to
pay the penalty
The issrnsd judge, In his opinion, said that In
absence Of statute the courts Of the United States
were governed In their practice In criminal cases BY
the rules Of the English common law. but that he
was aware Of NO instance In this country at least
in the courts Of the United States, where an sp.
pearancs BY counsel 10 q criminal cause has been
considered sufficient.
No one appear iu support Of the writ Of error
The Govsrnmsnt submits that In theory Of Law .
mans bail are jailors Of his own choosing and the
obligation they assume Is to a ehectuy secure bis
appearance and put him - much under the power
OF the court II he had been In the custody Of the
proper odicsr. (Hawkin's Pleas Of the Grown. BIZ
Oh. 10. SEQ. s4i Baoon's ABR, s'7i Pstsrhof on
The terms Of this rscogni.auoe import personal
obligated the defendant to appear In person. The
offence with which hs wss charged was punishabls
absolutely with imprisonment. The statute does
not invest the court with any discretion except
to the amount Of the hns to b imposed: This fact
Is Of controlling importance n constituting the REQ.
ognsanos with the view Of determining the precise
contract which the surety made. II, IN the case Of
An offence punishable only BY ans or BY ans and
imprisonmsnt st the discretion Of the court, the
court has power 70 wsivs the personal appearance
Of The party and to allow him to appear By counsel
whom the rseognisanes does not expressly bind him
to sppsar In psrson-a doctrine, however, opposed
to al authority snd prsotios-ths court In the case
Of such IN offence - this has no authority to sx.
sreiss any similar discretion The condition In this
reeognissnos obliged the defendant to appear on the
l7th Of November, and not to depart without leave
Of the court, importing - fully and strongly - II
1t had been Expressed corporal presence and per.
sonal appearances.
But II the obligation In question be placed upon
the lowest footing which is, that the motion made
In this case BY the counsel for the accused sub.
sct to the dscrstion Of the court to grant refuse
it-no writ Of error will lie on the decision Of the
court refusing to exercise Its discrston In favor Of
the accused. (Morssll W. Hall, 8 How. 2l6; Evans
". Phillip, I VII, 70; Young VI. Black. Craneh.
b65)
Henry Stsnbsry, Attorney General
| J. Hublsy Ashton, Assistant Attorney General.
Rendssees Of tho Judge, Of tie Supreme Court Of
| tie United Sfo<ss
Mr.. Chief Justice Chase, K street north. eorns
Of Sixth street west.
| Mr.. Justice Wayne, No. , Franklin Place, I
street.
M. Justice Nelson, National Hotel.
MI. Justice Grier, No. Q north A street. Capitol
Hill
Mr.. Justice Clifford, National Hotel.
Mr.. Justice swsyns, Willard's Hotel.
Mr.. Justice Miller, National Hotel.
Mr.. Justice Davis, National Hotel.
Mr.. Justice Field, Willard's Hotel.
John W. Wallace, reporter, National Hotel.
D. W. Middleton, clerk, No. s6S New Jersey
avenue.
David s. Gooding, U. 8. Marshal, 4sl 4 street.
CRIMINAL CorRr-Judge Fisher presiding
e. Q. Csrriuston, District Attorney, prosecuting