The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1886-02-02
The Mccarthy Extradition Case.

In the Supreme Court yesterday, at
Chambers, the extradition case of John
w. Mccarthy came up before His Honor
the Chief Justice. II. B. MS Commits
sioner, Major Wodehouse, Monsieur
Henri Feer, French Commissioner,
Senior Canavarro, Portuguese Commits
sioner, and the japanese Consul were
present to hear the proceedings.
His Excellency the Attorney General
presented the papers brought by De-
tective Bee. One is requisition to His
Majesty the King from the Governor of
California, as follows:
1t appears an indictment has been found
against John w. Mccarthy, who stands
charged with the crime of embezzlement,
committed in San Francisco, and that he
has fled from the justice of the State and
taken refuge in the Hawaiian Kingdom.
Therefore, pursuant to the provisions of
the Constitution and laws of the United
States, do hereby request that the said
John w. Mccarthy be apprehended and
delivered to Joseph Bee, who is authorized
to receive and convey him to the State of
California, there to be dealt with according
to law. GEORGE SLOVENIAN,
Governor of California.
THos. L. THOMPSON, Secretary of State.
The following is the indictment found
by the grand jury of the City and County
of San Francisco on the 18th day of jan
uary, 1886. 1t is signed by j. n. f.
Wilson, District Attorney, and two OF
the jurors, John p. Dunn, foreman, and
p. j. Sullivan:
That on or about the 28th day of Feb
ruary, 1885, at San Francisco, John w.
Mccarthy was an officer of the State of
California, to-wit: the duly elected quail
fled and acting Clerk of the Supreme Court
of said State and then and there by virtue
of his trust as such officer there came into
his possession and under the control of
said John w Mccarthy five hundred and
fifty dollars, in lawful money of the United
States, of the value of five hundred and
fifty dollars in lawful money of the Unit ed
States and OF the personal property of the
State of California. And the said John w.
Mccarthy, while said money and personal
property was so in his possession and UNI
der his control by virtue of his said trust as
such officer as aforesaid, then and there,
to-wit. on or about said 2Sth day of Feb
ruary, A. D. 1885, at said City and County
of San Francisco did wilfully, unlawfully,
fraudulently and feloniously appropriate
said money and personal property to his
own use, contrary to the due and lawful eX-
ecution of his said trust, and contrary to
the firm, force and effect of the statute in
such case made and provided, and against
the peace and dignity of the people of the
State of California.
Mr. Whiting, who appeared for Nc
Carthy, objected on the following
grounds First, that the papers should
have come from the United States Gov
ernment, and not from the State of Cali
! fornia. Second, that the indictment was
signed by clerk, and not by Judge.
Third, that the indictment is not evil
dence such as the Court can receive.
The Attorney General claimed the
papers were authenticated, and that by
law they are admissible. There could
be no objection to the genuineness OF
| those papers. The Indictment OF a grand
jiry is sufficient in order to obtain the
Courts ruling.
Mr.. Whiting argued that the papers
were not sufficient to be taken into evil
.lence. In the Hawaiian laws such
ptpers as were exhibited in this case
were not admissible. They would not
be evidence There must be evidence in
accordance with the laws of the King
dom that an offense as charged had been
committed The Court must find that
there was an eXtraditable offense, and
that it was properly brought before the
Court The State OF California was not
known among countries.
The following evidence was then taken !:
Paul Neumann, sworn, stated: l am
practitioner in the Courts of California J;
have been so for nineteen years. Under
the laws of California it is the duty of
the grand jury to inquire into, and after
inquiry, utter a commission or an in
dictment to the Court of Record, being
the Superior Court, of all crimes that
may be committed there. (The witness
tleh read several sections of the Penal
Codes of California in corroboration).
The Superior Court of California has ex-
elusive jurisdiction in all crimes of
felony.
Joseph Bee, sworn, stated: l reside