New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-05-27
ARGUMENT OF HENRY L. CLINTON.

THIS case comes before the Court on writ
certorar, allowed at the instance of Winchester
Brtton, formerly District Attorney OF Kings County to
review proceedings before Jddgc Fancher on habeas
corpus. which resulted in the discharge OF Wan. F. c.
shauks, city editor Of THE NEw-YoRK TRIBUNE, who
had imprisoned for refusing 10 answer certain
question asked him by the Grand Jury OF Kings County.
The facts are briefly as follows:
On the 22l day Of October 1873, Mr. shanks, in ODE
diencc to a Subpoena served upon him. attended as
witness before the Grand Jury OF Kings County. THE
TRIBUNE lad assaled OF the officials in Brooklyn
on charges OF malfeasance and corruption. While Mr..
shanks ready 10 inpar any information III MS pos,
prove the truth the facts charged IN THE TRIBUNE 1t
well known that his sense OF DUTY ana chlValrous
devotion TO the interests ot ms employers ana the PAPER
with which be connected, would prevent ms ais
closing the names OF persons VINO mao given GO hn
written articles which that paper had puD4snc1. An
order commit Mr. Shanks to jail was prepared before
hand 10y Winchester Brlttou Inc On
the 22 October Shauks was brought before Tue Court
of over aud 1ermner complaint Of the Grand Jury
that would not answer certain Question Inc ioi-
lowing questions were pn TO him IN open court nj,
Hethod o tie issue Of Aug 80, 1881 Al do Know
H. response to this question he answered as follows
dchre the cue toa because SIN instructed as one OF
d. si0 Gii' one o he sfce egdaiors and on the principle
ils tb paper tie eior is responsible tease, M 3l2)
Mr. Shanks vas not asked what Witnesses could prove
the facts stated IA the article IN question: nor was he
asked Ia regard t. facts which would aid tue al-
tbor,ies honest Efforts to bring 10 Jnstce those
charged win malt asauco and corruption in office. IL
Nj
know ledge OF the facts charged-hat lie had any in
formation except such as was derived IRON hearsay IL
wac well known WHO was the editor or IHE tribune.
and who responsible Tor the pupcauon OF the lacs
Mr. Shank- did not have his counsel with MIN 10 put In
iran is set: II Is suddenly sprung by Mr. ton his
order committing shanks 10 jan Is ready; IL is I'M
Court Of Kings County oyer and Terlniner-and he
is AT put custody OF an officer aud taken TO jail
breathe the prison atmosphere at the peril OF his Ee as
he had just risen from SICK bed after confinement
from fever obey the subpoena OF the Grand Jury.
On the following morning asa OctobeIl he was taken 10
New-York ha6eas corpus dd tesfcdadum, TO testi
over aud Ieimner. While here, his counsel, petit
ZION sworn by one of them (dr Rnnkle applied TO
Judge Fancher for habcas corpus, which was granted,
and made returnallc before him at the Supreme Court
ChamDes at oScS y N * ON saas Me f hd dep
~ of the Sheriff OF kugS County who had Mr. Shanks in
rysjody At2 o'clock D. M OF the 23 Mr. stllwe appeared
bf ne Judge Faucher together with the said W. f. G.
Shapks whom he had in custody, aud also George W.
Lyon esq who appeared for the Dstrict-Attorney OF
Kings Comfy aud on behalf of the people thereupon
the George ". Lyon did Tor tue saiG snern orally
Ike return that said sheriff held said W. r. o. shanks
under and by virtue OF the paper hereto annexed,
IDaIked Exhibit A. and also by virtue OF certain
Endorsed thereon which il also hereto annexed marked
Attached 20 EXHIBIT A.; and sad Lyon ouered 70 re-
duce the said to writing forthwith but the
counsel for the reator waived such written return until
the day. The matter was thereupon adjourned to
the 2.lh day OF October. 1873, and the prisoner
meantline committed to the custody OF ms counsel"
ISee Return OF Judge Faucher, foios II and 49,
The commitment Exhibit A" consigned Sbanks
TO indefinite PERPETUAL imprisonment as will be
shown hereafter The reported In the evening
papers OF NewYork and Brooklyn thai afternoon oct
49, In those reports II stated that Mr.. Shankss
counsel claimed that the commitment was void It's
for the that the imprisonment was not linn
so days the statute required That Shankss
ground have known Mr.. Britton for after
the habeas corpus proceedings before Judge Fancher
had been adjourned 10 The next day Gath OctODoT and
had been committed " the custody Of Of his
counsel, and after the Deputy Sheriff, Stilwe. had
returned t. Brooklyn without his prisoner (Mr
sbapks) another and totally different CON-
mitmenf which limited the Imprisonment 10 80
was left by Mr. Briton himself WITH the Sheriff Of
KINGS Coupty (TestiinOny OF Waller Thorne
y,n me evidence subject Judge Fsncher found
ss'wa,tor az fact, as follows The proof shows con-
clusiyely that the subsequent paper exhibit b. limiting
fbe 10 80 days. was not delivered % the
Sbern until after the hearing on the haoeas corpus
had comtenced." (See Judge F6nchers opinion fol
Xa) Mr. Brilton left this commitment at the sherims
once be tween and o'clock In the AFTERNOON VI the ISd
-, ueoher ana Within half oil AN hour
sfterwnrd and before the Deputy sberln sha clerk,
~ hose business to receive papers Hau the 10
read n and mark the back OF II the une oi
,iop Mr. Brittou took II away toee tesuuVn' io,s.
Ixsxl ON the following day cath OF Oc'oDeil, at .c
,s 10 when the proceedings before Judge fahcher
hsa Teen adjourned Mr. Brtton himself appeared on De
rail- az the Sheriff. In 10 the prOceednps On n
CAV Judge Faucher In his return TO the ceroia states
Tt, an s,d lat mentoned the ssd District Attorney WIN
xs.s, Britt p produced the sntten reufn oi Aras "
hereto .,
..s,o eve 10 Slth Efpbt b Stfeso
-, ~. lt A." made on the previous as d
80, le wa being s1bsutVss We eu >
~. au.i A o.h tie iaio ie'siS o NC A' o'e'