The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-03-30
&C. The two years had expired on the 25tn OF
February last.
Judge McArthur kad II somethino was mot


Judge Macarthur asked if something was not
SAID about being fugitive from Justice.
MI Harrington replied that the law provided
lor this limitation. unless the party was fugitive
from Juslce, but II was not pretended that Mr.
King had been Il fugitive. lie mad been Postmas-
ter OF the House, with his residence at Minneapo-
lis TO wnich place ne had returned on the ad-
JourDmcnt OF the House. They claimed that IL
was the duty OF the Court to say TO the Grand Jury
that they could not examine this case, as 10 send
q witness 10 a Grand Jury was prosecution. Mr.
harrington discussed the question as 20 the Kind
OF evidence 10 be sent 10 the Grand Jury, and
urged ttat this book was not the kind OF evidence
10 DE sent TO thar body.
KING FUGITIVE FROM JUSTICE.
Judge Fisher read ron Krigntiy, page 222,
which the question OF limitations came in. 1t
could be made IN plea IN bar 1t was well known
having been placed IN the Sergeant-at-Arms'
hands, winch he (king) had evaded the SER
wee VIC o. All Indictment Tor perjury was wanted.
he (the District Attorney asked 10 move
for an express order 10 exhibit bill OF ndc:menG
against W. ). King for The crime OF perjury IN
swearing falsely, That said w. ). King had never
directly or indirectly, received any sum OF money
Tor advocating the passage OF bill, &c. and TO
SEND up b charging Mr.. J. &. Schumaker with
General Butler said that great deal had been
Representatives. That body was dead, and it
might be said OF 1t that live lackass is better
than dead lion That body was not Ike the
senate. III mad no existence now They were Ike
every other mob oil two hundred and more gentle
men men-they had no jndciai powers. although OF
as much as small police court. This report
which II Is proposed 20 send to the Grand jury.
read, 1t had been stated that Mr.. KING was u
fugitive IRON justice. lie had evaded the process
because ne dld not wish TO give evidence which
couid De USED IN case against him by tue Pacinc
Mall Company to deprive him oil his property.
The Grand Jury were 70 inquire. &C., on legal EVIL
dence not otherwise. To sending up witnesses
they mad no objection, but they might as W ell send
the Tribune or the New York sun to the Grand
Jury as tnis book TO Inform them General Butler
Tue neelng from justice, according to the Revised
Statutes.
THE REVISED STATUTES
Judge FlSher SAID that the offence was commit
tea before the Revised statutes were adopted.
proposed to prosecute had been repealed. lie had
some diill1ence IN referring to the fact that a
Dill was hurried through the House-not high au.
thorlty, but the best we had-ln order to save the
limitations. and the prosecutor himself had drawn
up TINS bll. He thought he was right. AS to
lleeng from justice, King did not do so. Fleeing
from the service OF II subpoena vas not fleeing
:! ON Justice. He nad fed from injustice He
would not object to competent witnesses going
before the Grand Jury. Mr.. King could DE found at
any time Now he mad no desire to nee except
OF a court of Justice he hoped that ne would not
be made to suffer in court OF justice for an accu-
sAtlon based only on hearsay, rumor and SANDER.
III ne Is 10 suffer here let 1t be on the testimony OF
competent witnesses.
DECISION EXCLUDING THE REPORT.
Judge Macarthur said that without the applica-
ton made by the District Attorney ne very mucn
questioned the power OF the Court 10 Interfere.
mere is no delegation or judicial power by tine
constitution to either House or Congress. except
In matters Of contempt or lmpeachment. When
either House attempts to make complaints they
should only have the same respect as Is given to
iDdlylduals OF respectaOlty. II struck him that
the House OF Representatives nad no power and
never could have such power Neither House IS
authorized to prosecute. There is no such thing
as an lnformer before the Grand Jury. The appii-
cation OF the District Attorney was Irregular Tor
the BOOK was not testimony, and 1t would be in
competent to lay 1t before the Grand jury. AS
to the statute OF limitations winch had been dis.
cussed, this could not be discussed at the present
point. That point could be made by plea In bar.
me case VIII now go to the jury IN the usual
manner.