The New York herald., 1869-05-22
under the warrant OF commitment charging her
with keepnQ q baWdy house.

Will keeping DoWuy uouoos
Fsra-Becauss Of commitment not In due
aw void in that the particular place where the
upon lis acs Il does not even appear kept bawdy
house within the limits Of the s,sts q New York
crime, is al mosi msdemesnor and she
,s r. g w,se 1. nan II examination ssis snd
FsS:: being II Ii fay %
spec's the best OF her knowledge and belief
Sworn before me this 2lst day q Nay, 1859 ,u,r,
Similar answers to the foregoing were sworn to
and presented by counsel on behalf Of Joanna Con-
nor, the other petitioner.
Counsel for the prosecution then stated why
Messrs Stoughton and Shea appeared, and said that
they were present for the purpose OF giving counte
TO this proceeding on the part OF the prosecu
o 5 lwo ro a1s nave ees
to the City Prison for examination upon two crlmi-
nal complaints. The first consists In the charge
second cS '' consists insists in "S the allegation that
they were guilty Of q criminal sontempt
New York Tese took place on the
eth OF May 1863. On the 18th the counsel who now
represents these women applied TO MS Honor justice
vor, returnable before your Honor. Now, this writ
OF habeas corpus is meant to operate In the nature
OF writ Of removal. These writs are properly be-
under your commitment OF May z, ana
the intent In obtaining this writ OF haoeas
corpus evidently was to remove these complaints
before some other judge That object was deleated
by making the writ returnable before your Hol0r
IL,
in the Investigation under this writ he has got to
establish the urisdlctiOnal allegations In his petition
for the writ. Now the Court win perceive tnat the
statute Is particularly exacting. There must be
some cause against the magistrate or the complaint
before it De removed from his Jurisdiction That
cause is alleged in the petition. II c0unsei 90 not
prove the allegations the writ OF haDeas corpus
must be discharged and the matter lapses into the
original jurisdiction-that ia, the complaint which
the Court original entertained against these wo-
men.
aMr. Townsend-If the Court win allow me to 60
nUA nnra tha
regard to the petition think l can show that 1t
complies with all those requirements. Counsel then
read the provisions O the statute and claimed that
the petitions were In accordance with them.
Judge CardOzo said he could not hear hun on that
point.
Mr. Townsend said he would proceed to call in
one Of the witnesses. He was informed by the prs-
oners that they were not guilty. He was informed
1t would be advisable to take an adjournment for
two or three days. He would be inclined to act
upon any suggestion Of the Court.
peroTmanee e Of my duty duty and % that TT @ shall do sun un.
ninchingy. II you desire an adjournment shall
hear you upon that point.
Subsequently Mr.. Townsend called Mrs. Pearsall as
witness, who was examined as folows:-
Q. Are you one OF the persons confined In the
Tombs ut presents A. Yes, SIR
Q. How long have you been thereS A: have
been in the Tombs two weeks; was In the Sixth
ward station house on Thursday night.
q. Do you know OF q public Application having
been made or others IN the public newspapersf
The District Attorney objected.
Judge Card0zo-The question i6 0verruled.
Examination resumed-Q. Have you been here be-
fore this court within the last week or ten daysS A.
/ have been here within the last ten days, as re-
member.
Q. Did you hear your counsel make application az
that time for an examination in this case9 A. Yes,
Q. That was week agoq A. Yes, sir.
Q. Have you made any application to the Court for
an examination In the case9 A. have, through the
Judge Cardozo-Not through the papers-have
you made any application personally to mef A.
have not been present at the time.
Judge CardOZO-Make answer to the question.
Have you made any application to me2 A. have
not had the opportunity; have not been present
to mef A. No. sir; have not spoken to you.
Mr.. Townsend-I now desire to show that the ap-
plication has been made over her signature IN the
Judge Cardozo refused to hear the application.
Mr. Townsend then repeated his motion for the
discharge on The ground that the commitment did
not set forth any specific offence, which the statute
described a. indispensaby necessary.
subsequently adyertng to the matter supplied to
newspaper, Mr.. Townsend said he did not hold
himself responsible.
Judge Cardozo said II was grossly incorrect.
Mr. Townsend was about to make remark, when
The Court desired him to proceed with the argu-
Mr.. Townsend then proceeded to argue that the
statute referred alike to commitments for examina-
ton and commitments for contempt.
4. Judge Cardozo overruled all the points made In
The District Attorney said they were prepared to
give these persons an examination before his Honor
In regard to both the accusations II they desired 1t.
Mr. T0wnsend-We do.
Judge CardOzO-I shall hear you now simply on
the question arising under the writ of habeas corpus
to whether o cause OF detention is shown. Hav-
ing disposed OF that shall make such further dispo
sition as think proper. II you have anything fur
ther on that point proceed TO say II.
Mr.. Townsend-l have nothing
Judge CardoZo-I Will take these writs and ad-
journ the proceeding over until Tuesday next. un-
less some OF you gentlemen desire to make further
suggestion.
proceed now In the contempt case, and we waive an
examination upon the other charge.
Judge CardozO-lo GU cannot separate them. n
you desire an examination take It now.
Mr.. Townsend consulted with his clients and then
said they would be obliged to wait until Tuesday.
Judge CardoZo said he would take the papers and
habeas corpus matter and reserve decision until
Tuesday next, when day would be fixed for the
examination or admit the prisoners to bail II they
desired
Mr.. Townsend said there was an objection to bail
being fixed and requested that day might be fixed
for the examination.
The Court declined 10 nx day and adjourned the
the case till Tuesday.