Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1885-05-05


grand srceny, said indictment purDorting "a
have been returned by the grand jury oil
the state and county Of New
York. is presented TO either. with be
requisit on Of the Governor of the State OF
New ork, and the consequent order of the
' Governor OF Georgia Is presented as the war
rant for the arrest and purposed eNtrad ton.
Ii is objected by the counsel fer the feiatof
that the indictment does not 40 IS proper
charge of crime. It Is urged % the crime
set out, to wit. grand larceny, % lriooy ana
that the indie ment Is against sey-f defend
ants, and that there are no aYcrmcuts snow
ing the degrees Of the guilt, whether as
PRINCIPAL IN the first or second deFrere,'. or as
accessory before or after the fact TINS OBJ
lection. in the OPINION Of the court, would nave
been dangerous to the
VALIDITY OF THE INDICTMENT,
it beng felony under the rules of the com
. mon law.
This Indictment. however, must be consid-
cred in view OF the statutory regulations per-
. tnent thereto i'm the state II New York, and
I we find that in that state parties charged
I with felony or indicted jointly precisely as
/ were mlsdemeanors Of common law. Second
I revised statutes, section 69S)
I There, this rule applies to the whole range
I OF feionie'. ana, as a consequence, IL lolloW9
/ that prime pals in The second degree may be
+ indicted and prosecuted as principals in the
first. This is the doctrine OF the common law
where he punishment is the same. (Archi-
bald Grim plead, s Am. cd, y. G3.)
ThD objection, therefore, is not sustained.
II Is further objected To the legality of this
I detention tha the indictment does not prep
erlv alegc the ownership " the bonds alleged
to have been stolen, and that the allegation
that they were the bonds of the Bethlehem
iron company without alleging the corporate
character OF such company is fatal defect.
PROFESSIONALLY there is authority pointing 60
this conclusion. After careful and anxious
consideration OF this question the court feels
II to be improper that it should
DISCHARGE THE DEFENDANT
on this ground, amt thinks it in every view
fnp urNsN fNHsa ftf4u ssraN. to fNn..
question of the su0iciencv of the
indictments to be tried an determined by
the courts of the state n which il was found.
The settled policy # the government being
10 f-cihtate the eXtradition of fugitives
charged with crime, and, in view Of the great
importance of this policy TO the commercial
pr sperlv anu the integrity IN business
trans sections between the citizens OF the seve-
raj states, 10 would be a dangerous precedent
and as well in conflict with eminent authority
to hold That such matters Of technical irregu-
larty SHAH denv the cXtradition.
Certain afhdavts ar also offered by the
relator, the practical effect Of which Is a de-
NAL of guilt. 1t is sufficient to say that
the court in this proceeding will not consider
that question. A proper charge OF crime
having been presented to the court it is the
undoubted duty to decline to investigate
THE GUILT OR INNOCENCE
OF the praoner. The authorities upon tins
su ggestlon are numerous. conclusive and adj
verse TO the contention Of the cOur sci of re-
lator. IL would he otherwise were the arrest
made upon preliminary process. ana before
Indictment In that event investigation
would be had at least to disclose If there be
a Prosecution in good faith, and if there be
probable cause to suspect the guilt of the
party acrused.
It is further urged, and with great appa-
rent confidence by the distin uished counsel
for the relatOr. that the facts do not snow
that the rclatOr is fugitive from Justice
IL is The opinion Of the court that one who
goes into state and commits crime and
q g IN a IUp fraf
justice as though he had commit q crime
in the state in which he resided and then fed
to some other state.
With the other considerations personal to
the reiat0r advanced By counsel the court can
properly have no concern. The law is mex
orabl9, and the court is but its servant, and
must like all others. obey its teachings. The
writ is dsallowed, and the petition Of the re-
lator dismissed.
APPEAL TO THE CIRCUIT COURT.
AS soon as his Honor had finished read
ing, Capt. Mercer arose and begged leave
to take an appeal to the Circuit Court.
This was rather unexpected, though
not by the opposing counsel.
Judge Speer remarked that he thought
he had been sitting as in the Circuit
Court, and had heard the case as sitting
in that court. Upon reference to the
papers, however, it appeared that he had
issued the writ out OF the District Court,
and that IL was heard in the same.
The appeal wa prayed under the fol-
lowing from Federal procedure:
SEC. 76S. An appeal NAV be taken from any
court, justice or judge inferior to the Circuit
Court upOn a writ OF habeas corpus
l. In the case of any person alleged to be re-
trained of his liberty in violation Of the con-
stltution or any law or treaty Of the United
states.
The defense held that as Roberts claimed
to be restrained Of his liberty through a
had a right TO ask an appeal. because if
the indictment was ms-drawn he was
held in violation of the laws of the United
States. Judge Speer at first was inclined
to the opinion that an appeal could not
be granted. It was then 3: 80, and he an
nOunced that at 1880 he would hear argu-
ment on that point.
FIXING ROBERTS BAIL.
After the recess counsel on both sides
occupied nearly two hours in argument.
Finally the JUDGE stated tn Il he believed
that the accused had a right to appeal, and
he accordingly allowed it.
"What bail will be required?" asked
judge Twiggs.
'sWell," replied Judge Speer, II should
think that one who could retain such an
array OF eminent counsel would be able to
give almost any bail.v
The court fixed the amount Mt $4,000.
and Roberts was given five days in which
to secure It. In the meantime he will be
in the custody of United States Marshal
Wade.
The granting Of the appeal to the Cir
cult Court has further delayed matters.
judge Speer will not hear it again, for he
said he would certainly give the same
decision. 1t will then come before Judge
Woods or Judge Pardee. Messrs.
Chisholm and Miller will try to have the
case brought up as soon as possible.
The defense will try to keep il off at least
until the next term OF court. Il can
hardy be heard before May 30. when
judge Woods NAV possibly take IL un at
Macon. Mr.. Kelley viii probably re-
turn 10 New York.
Roberts left the city in custody of the
United States Marshall for his home last
night
Tnn ERIannn A. rnNNnf.A srrnnr