New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-06-11
qreenbaeteys the Anti Monopoiss and the Labor msn
Gould usitsdlS cast their SURFACES, why thon thSR
chances Of beating Blaine and Logan would bs very good
indeod.
EMO RELEASED IND REARRESTED.
HIS SECOND ARREST DECLARED ILLEGAL,
JUDGE TESTERS DEcIsIoN-How THE THIRD AR.
REST WAS MADE.

Tester to-day In response to applications made by the
Crown and defence in regard to the writ Of certorah
| auxiliary to haDeas corpus. The Crown was repro
sented by Mr. Pelleter, the private prosecution by
Mr. Fitzpatrick and the defence by Messrs Dunbar.
Irvine and Tester There large crowd Of spec
tators among those present being High Constable
Bissonets who was understood to have in bis posses
sion the warrant issued by Judge Monks Of Montreal
in connection with the preliminary proceedings for extra
don Mr.. Irvine, for the defence, read Fabey's de-
position before Desnoyers on the warrant issued
| against Emo for having in his possession $4,000
stolen from the Second National Bank Of New-York.
Mr. Dunbar said the application which he made for
Eno's discharge based three grounds-that ths
offence was complex that 1t not contemplated BY
tho statute and that Emo charged with receiving
and at the same time with having taken the money.
He could not be both receiver and thief old doctrine
recognized by the highest court in the Province Aa
objection TO the second warrant that it was nothing
more nor less than tho first. 1t might be somewhat
| more explicit, but 1t charged the same offence.
"Thank God" he said "a man could not be i'm
prsoned or tried twice for the offence In Canada"
Mr. Tester said that generally the Canadian courts
have not power try persons for offences committed in
| the United States which not mentioned in tho
treaty When warrant or indictment Ia bad in part
is bad In whole 1t true, he said that the second
offence might be said to come under the statute but ac-
t,sv offences Mr. Pelleter said the first warrant was
defective because it did not mention the offence but the
present said Emo had money which he knew had
been stolen If the first warrant had no status, this
second warrant for the offence was also invalid
The case he said had lasted long time and wasa curl
Gus and extraordinary The Government had done
all it could to meet the views OF the American uoyern-
ment and the same time protect the rights oil mo
prisoner. Let those who were responsible, nc SAID,
| bear the responsibility. The Crown would leave the
matter In their hands Mr. Fitzpatrick said that pre-
Stunning there defect in the warrant, which he was
not prepared 20 admit who was arrested for lar
ceny could under the law be committed Tor hnrder;
Irvine to Emo being charged with being thief as
well as a receiver he said the same objection had been
met in the of Regina against HenesSy uhuer SEQ
ton III of the Larceny act He cOntcnded that COM
parsOn of warrants would SHOW such dlnelcnce
as to dates and the offence charged The offence
could not be charged in both of them When the first
warrant was issued Fahey knew Emo to be other than
the man he looking for, while the information ON
which the second warrant based was obtained alter
Enos arrest. This was, he said, case OF trying
foreigner for committing offence ont of Canada NOE
for committing offence In Canada to which the stat
Mr. Irvine said the proper time for discussing rcspon
| sibites in an action for damages The Two
offences named in the two warrants were really the
same Ii was a warrant could not be set aside Tor
mere technical objections.
| JUDGE TESTER ORDERS RELEASE OF EMO.
Judge Tesser said he had been far enlightened on
| the subject by what had been said as to come to a
proper conclusion regarding the case. After reciting
the facts of the case he said have to decide
whether the petitioner is legally detained under the
second warrant 1t clear that the offence stated in
the first part of this warrant to larceny
mitted In the State of New York. The petitioner is
subject TO exraditiOn but there has been no demand
made to that effect before me, although delay OF
several days has elapsed since the nrst arrest AS
general rule in criminal matters no man can be tried or
punished in this country for crimes committed by MN
In foreign country 1t is to meet such eases that laws
and treaties of extraditlon are made The larceny NOS
being charged having been committed IN Canada Due
in foreign country is not subject TO our jurisdiction.
except by extradtOn. There remains another part OK
the statement in the werrantthat of having elOni-
ously brought stolen money into Canada. This offence
Is within jurisdiction. The question arises, Gan =
orson he arrested second time by process of the
Justice of the peace for the offence, after having
been liberated under writ OF habeas corpus new
and amended warrant could have been substituted for
the first, but it not done Ii was only alter the
Liberation of the prisoner that the second warrant was
executed Then comes the question whether section III
of Chapter 90 Consolidated Statutes OF Lower canada,
appestha no person set at large upon haDeas corpus
| shall at any time thereafter be again Imprisoned or
committed for the same offence by any author.
offence contained in the first warrant OF arrest there Is
no new of arrest BY the return TO writ Of GER
tiOrar appears that the evidence taken before mag
strate is only hcarsay evidence, and there Is no legal
evidence to establish even prima face case to sub
stanate the offence charged in the warrant 1t is there
| stated that no more evidence can be procured in
Canada, except witnesses who may be brought from
New-Yor and demand Is made to bring them be-
under the scope of international law have always been
the subject OF great difficulty in dealing with them in
proper manner in this and other countries" Alter
citing the of Lamuande, the Judge continued;
81 have not to pronounce the question OF extradt
on but am bound to pronounce and declare as heSai
this second warrant or arrest Tor the reasons ao9v
mentioned because the accused after having boon LID
Grated under haeeaS corpus cannot oe arrested again
re and because there Is no legal evidence to substan
tate the offence mentioned in the warrant OF arrest
Therefore maintain the present writ of habeas corpus
| and order that said Joan O. Emo be liberated
BIssoNEITE AGAIN ARRESTS EMO.
The Judgment was received In silence. Neither the
Crown the private prosecution seemed to know wsas
10 do the more so since Judge TesSer had informed
High Constable Bssonette when the up before
that II lie dared Eno before the court was cleared
he would order his arrest FOR contempt Not word was
| and High Constable Bissonette did not know
in conversation for few moments with his counssl
lie, then, in their company, moved neryonsy about
eyes Of the wach Bissonette being ryetted upon
him As he descended the steps after being free man
for ten minutes, BssOnette in his seat and taking
Crt House yard Fno topped for moment to sneak TO
High constable Gale OF Quebec. Bissonette was there
in an Instant and presenting h warrant Win the ar on
Bsonec and his prisoner then entered the police court
buildings and in Gales office Emo read the warrant Is
declaration made in NewYor accusing him of forgery
and feloniogs utsrsnsS OF forged ~, az
lie Gas also charged with having made false entries in
| the accounts and books OF the bank.
In anticipation OF this arrest proceeding. had been
taken for new writ OF habaes corpus, and BsSonette
Immediately returned with his prisoner 10 the Court
Chamber where Judge Tester PRESIDED having by his
| side Judge Caron and Judge Chsuy0su. nr IRVINE
in the opening proceedings, said, amid considerable
excitement, that the present proceedings should
| have been taken long The object OF the preseGa
haDeas corpus that the prisoner be brought before
the Judge here lie then read petition that the prsOney
be brought before Judge Caron or some other competent
| Judge in This district.
| At this stage Of tho proceedings Enc's
brother. accompanied by q Hew-lOlk Trend,
| arrived in court.
Judge Tester said HIS health and the pressure OF bus
ness would prevent his proceeding with the case any r
Their ard he therefore asked his colleague Judge CarO
who was present 6take hold OF Y, 70 which the Latter
assented Judge Caron askcl II Bissoneitc had made