The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1878-05-23
QUESTION OF BAIL.
The Day Robbers Ask to Have Their
Bail Reduced.

1t was stated in the PRESS of yesterday that
movement was on foot to have the bail Of the
Day robbers reduced so as to allow them to 60
free until their trial. Mr.. Sylvester, their
counsel. filed petition with Judge Goddard
and M. P. Frank, esq.,, bail commissioners for
this county, for hearing for the reduction of
bail. Upon the petition the commissioners
ordered a hearing, which took place at the
lobby of the court room last evening, The
prisoners were brought in by the sheriff and
/ they were represented by Mr.. Sylvester. Coun-
ty Attorney Libby appeared for the state.
Mr.. Sylvester claimed that the evidence
brought at the Municipal Court was not suffi-
Gent to hold them, and if to hold them, not
in such large sum-$15OO each. To prove
this he proceeded to call witnesses to detail the
testimony upon which the men were bound
over. Mr.. Libby objected to the production of
such testimony at that point He commended
that it was not question IS to whether there
were sufficient grounds to hold sthe men. That
matter had been finally settled. He asked the
commissioners to decide three questions:
1ss--Have they power to reduce bail in such
cases?
2d-If they have such power when the Su-
poIIOI OUQLt Is Ill bcSSlOu
3d-Whether or not they can review the
question Of probable cause?
The first two questions were answered in the
affirmative, but on the latter there was some
doubt expressed. They thought that there was
probable cause aud the .questson was as to the
degree of probable cause. They thought to do
Justice by all parties it would bs best to let the
petitioners give recapitulation Of the testi-
mony, that they might determine as to wheth-
or the bail was excessive as claimed.
Mr.. Sylvester then called Judge Kingsbdry,
Officer Barton and Mr.. Charles Day to give
parts of the testimony upon which the men
were bound over. There is no doubt but what
these witnesses endeavored to reproduce the
testimony given at that time, but it would have
been miracle if they had succeeded. They,
with the exception of Mr. Day, only happened
into the court room at the time, and did not
pay particular attention. Mr.. Libby in his
cross-examination brought out very many
facts which were of material Importance to the
case.
At the conclusion of the testimony Mr..
Libby argued the case at some length and with
much ability. He claimed that the men were
professionals and did not intend to stand q
trial If they could get off on any reasonable
bail. BE said that upon facts recently brought |
to his attention, he thought that the present |
bail was much too low. He recited the threads |
Of testimony that connected them with the |
larceny and claimed that it was too impor-
tant case to reduce the bail. Mr.. Sylvester |
claimed that the testimony of the case was very |
weak and it was not just that these men should |
be kept In jail all summer. He said the men
were without means and could only be released |
upon a considerable reduction of the bail
The case was not concluded until q late hour |
and the commissioners decided to reserve their |
decision. The prisoners were ordered locked |
up in the meantime.