Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1881-10-07
TIE CASE OF CAPT. HOWGATE,
Proceedings on the Writ Of Habcas Corpus.



This morning there was large crowd in the
nminal Court room, the hour Of 10 o'clock to-
iay having been fixed last Wednesday for the
eturn to be made to the writ of habeas corpus
irected to Gen. John s. Croker warden of the
U-S Jail. on petition of Capt. H. w. HOwgate.
'harged with the embeZZlement of government
unds, and committed to jail on Wednesday by
Commissioner Bundy in default Of 10000 bail.
Capt. HOwgate was brought into court by
'eputy Warden Russ, and soon afterwards Gen.
rocker came in. There were present Messrs.
wilson, Cuppy, IngersOll and A. B. Williams Of
apt. HOwgates counsel; Col w. A. Cook,
pecial attorney, and G. b. Corkhill, US. attor-
ney. representing the government.
The case was called to the attention of the
court by Mr. Wilson.
Col. Corkhill read the return to the writ made
~ Gen. Croker. reciting that HOwgate was in
lis custody by virtue of the commitment of Com
missioner Bundy.
Mr.. Wilson stated that prior to August %. 1881,
apt. HOwgate was arrested in Michigan on the
;harge Of embezzling $40, 800 of the moneys of
he United States, and was brought here. He
yaiVed examination and gave bail and left
he city. The grand jury having resumed
to session this week Capt. Howgate
arrested and taken before Commissioner
bundy, and was required to give bail in like sum
If S40,O About the time of the first proceed
ngs, the United States brought civil suit for
s1Ol. GOO. and caused attachments to be issued
which covered the whole of HOwgate's property,
and these proceedings are pending. The prop
erty attached was all encountered and beyond this
vas worth O.OOO to $4,000 He was also the
owner of property in Florida, which had
likewise been attached. They had this
series of affairs: For embeZZling $40, eco,
ne was required to give bond in
that amount-a palpable violation of law.
Then, having seized on all his property he is
again arrested and held on an additional bond
of 500 1t seemed to him that he need not
say that this last bond was excessive and should
be reduced: nay, that on this last charge How
gate ought to be allowed to go free on his per-
sOnal recOgnZance for the government was
already in possession of his bonds. In addition,
the government had his official bond as diSburs-
ing officer for go, 900.
Col. Cook said that the facts presented by Mr.
Wilson were substantially correct but there were
important omissions in his statement. 1t was
true that the first arrest was On the $40 000 but
shortly afterwards investigation showed de-
falcatiOn of $50, 600 more but before the warrant
could be served HOwgate 1T and the most vigil
liant officers from this city and New York failed
to find him. He was hid away and did not re-
turn on the assembling of the grand jury. but
clandestinely, and the officers of
the government discovered him. 1t was true
that his property had been attached. He had
been proceeded against under section 54SS
which prescribes apunishment of Imprisonment
with labor. of from one to ten years. or by fine
not more than the sum embeZzled or less than
s1.OOO, or both fine and imprisonment. The
manifest idea of the law was that the pecuniary
penalty should equal the amount of the loss.
The commissioner. therefore. seemed to have
this in view when he fixed the amount. In Ott-
man. case. when the charge W as made the amount
Of bail on the charge OF embeZZling $40. 600 was
fixed in a like sum. HOwgate did not surrender
himself when he arrived, and was arrested by
the officers, and the amount having been run up
to s1O5,O GOO. he now asks to go. on his former
bail of $40 GEO. While it was true that the prop
erty seized was in his name, according to the
theory of the government it belonged to it, NOR
ally. for it was claimed to have been purchased
with the embfZZled funds.
Col COrkhill followed Col. Cook. remarking
that Capt. HOwgate disappeared shortly after
the hearing in August, and he now returns, and
upon an entirely new proceeding new charge
was made and new warrant was issued, on
which he was committed. The question is Is
this bail, $4,000, on a charge of embezzling
stO.OOO, excessive. The practice Of the court
was to hold the accused to an amount of bail
commensurate with the amount of
money stolen. They do not stand as ordinary
for they unite with crime breach of
public trust. He instanced the case of Tweed
in which the bail was fixed at 81, OOO. GOO There
were two objects in view, one to secure the at
tendance of the party, and the other to secure
the government.
JUDGE cox ON THE QUESTION OF BAIL.
Judge Cox said: There is distinction that
civil case and that which is required in a crimi-
nal proceeding. In the civil case the defendant
has to give bail to secure the amount stolen:
while in the criminal. bail is fixed for the pur-
pose OF securing the attendance of the person
charged with crime. But there is no such thing
as bail in civil cases known here as it may be in
New York, where the bail is fixed at sum
large enough to pay the Judgment which may be
obtained. In other words, the bail is generally
large enough to cover the amount of money EN-
n6 D,,%f hat
simply to secure the attendance of the defendant
before the court, and no writ of scire facids can
issue for the amount of the alleged defalcatiOn
The bail, therefore. is not fixed in reference to
the amount alleged to have been distracted
from the government: it has no necessary rela-
ton to it. The only relation that that has to
the amount of bail fixed, and probably the
amount which it suggests is large. is because the
accused might indemnify his bail out of the
money which he has obtained and then abscOnd.
But the primary and sole object is to secure the
attendance of the prisoner at court. Now we
are confronted here by the Constitution which
says that excessive bail shall not be required"
What is excessive bail? Under all the cir
in this case. am informed that if
the government succeeds in establishing that
this man is guilty of defalcatien to the amount
alleged, the government will secure the amount,
because Of the fact that they have the property
Of the defendant virtually in their own hands,
and then. / suppose. his securities are RESPONSE
UIc HELL III seeiIS 10 HE. therefore, tnar the
amount of bail fixed by the commissioner is ex-
cessive. / think, however. that there should be
some additional bail to meet this additional
charge. if the accused can give additional ball.
and will fix the amount at $4,000.
HOWGATE WENT AWAY FOR HIS HEALTH.
Mr.. A. E. Williams.-If your honor please
do not think he can give that amount of bail
wish to say. in answer to what has been said
here by the government. that the defendant re-
turned here clandestinely; that he returned here
on the limited express, which arrives at the
Baltimore and Potomac depot about o'clock in
The afternoon, and that he did not return CLAN
lestinely, but openly. Mr.. Howgate thought
hat all matters in regard to his case had been
arranged and settled. He gave bail. which was
set at $40, COO, and he thought that was amply
sufficient. He went away because his health
required him to do so. But he was in commune
cation with Washington. and was watching the
here, and he returned here as soon
as the circumstances of this case required
Your honor will remember that the grand
Jury met on the 18th of last month. but was i'm
session only two days. and after that adjourned.
and that adjournment was announced all over
the country by the public press. and thereby
came to che knowledge of Capt. Howgate and he
thought it was not necessary for him to return
to the city until the meeting of the grand iury
which was on the I'd of this month. Then. on
the 4th OF 9Th