Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1888-08-15
LOCAL INTELLIGENCE
SEBELLE HAS VANISHED.
Rhoads and Ross Discharged for Want
of Prosecufiou

Rhoads and Ross Discharged for Want
of Prosecution.
The attendance at the Police Court yes
terday morning was not large and the pro-
ceedings were without much interest.
When the cases of Frank Rhoads, charged
with battery, and Andrus Ross, charged
with gaming, were called, City Attorney
Church arose and said: 81 understand that
the police force has made diligent search
and inquiry as TO this complainant, Sc
belle, and he has not been heard from. 1
do not suppose there is anything left for me
to do but to make a motion TO dismiss both
cases for want of prosecution. l regret
very much that man of that particular
kind should come down here and prefer
charges against citizens and not follow them
up and l also regret very much that he
cannot be here to answer for himself and
show cause why he has not prosecuted
these charges. If there had been anything
done that is criminal and which ought to
be prosecuted, he should have been here to
give his evidence, and if there has not, he
ought to be punished for not doing SO. l
would like to have the alias subpoena stand,
so that if this man is found in the city
within the next few months he can be re-
quired to come before this Court and an
swer for his conduct. At the present time
l make motion to dismiss both cases.
The action of this man places the Court
the Court officers and the defendants in
very embarrassing position. 1t makes it
appear as If things had been done which
probably have not been done and when a
person takes it upon himself to compromise
everybody around him for the purpose OF
getting revenge, or blackmailing someone
else possibly, he ought to be punished him
self as being the party who has violated the
laws of the State. / think it is possible that
he may be found within the city within
few months or weeks, and if he is | would
like to have him come here and give some
explanation of his proceedings
E. G. Hart, counsel for the defendants,
said: " speak in good faith when say
that we were anxious TO have this prose
cutting witness present. l was anxious TO
have him here because it would save a
good deal OF criticism that would probably
come from people who like to criticise, and
also because | know very well from con-
versauons that have had, that the prose-
cutting witness could not have testified to
a single, solitary fact to fasten guilt upon
Mr.. Ross or Mr.. Rhoads. The act of Mr..
Rhoads, If any act were shown, was per
fectly justitiable, and we are here prepared
to meet the accusation. am also satisfied.
record, that he was in the habit of engag-
ing in business which savors of black
mailing; that when he gets few drinks in
him the first thing that comes in mis- mind
is to do something that will enable him to
get money without working for it. He
was drunk when these complaints were
made and | am satisfied that if he thought
then any injury had been done him it was
simply an hallucination of the brain,
Narfr,s Il 10 81 ,.l
Ii he can be found | would
like to have him here to demonstrate that
there has been sort of tempest in a tea
pot in relation to this matter, and that
there is nothing in the charges that he
brought. / am satisfied that when he got
sober enough to understand what he had
done, he concluded he was himself the
most guilty party and that if he came
here he would be the one who would be
finished, and that the only extenuating
circumstances in his case, if he was prose-
cuted, would be that be was drunk. Mr.
Anderson and myself both instructed Off
Ger Franks to get the man here If possible
We wanted him here, but he did not want
to be here"
Judge Buckley said that it seemed that
the complaining witness had purposely
gone Somewhere out of the reach of the
subpoena of the Court. He had been told
/ o..
not be reached by subpoena. There was
no other course but to grant the motion,
and the cases were dismissed for want of
prosecution.
Austin Keely was charged by his wife
with threats against life and disturbing the
peace, but George A. Blanchard appeared
as counsel for the prosecuting witness and
asked that the cases be dismissed, saying
that he was ready to pay the costs. He said
the complaint was made under a stress of
circumstances and that the wife did not de-
sire to prosecute. The cases were there
fore dismissed for want of prosecution
Mrs. Desmond, poor, demented woman,
was brought up for sentence, having been
convicted of disturbing the peace of her
neighbors, Her case is most unfortu-
nate one, and elected the sympathy of both
Court and spectators. In her present state
of mind she is easily provoked to disturb
ance of the peace, and there is some evil
dence that her neighbors, or their children,
do things which, while they would not be
noticed by perfectly sane person, are cal
culated to irritste and provoke woman in
her state Of mind. OF course, when dis
turbance takes place, they have no trouble
in proving that Mrs. Desmond is very yio-
lent and abusive, and she is the one con-
victed, as she has only her own testimony
against that of q whole neighborhood, but
from statements made yesterday morning
it is evident that if another disturbance
takes place in that neighborhood the case
will be investigated so thoroughly that
there may be more than one conviction.
Mrs. Desmond was fined $40, but under the
discretion of the Court, on account of her
poverty, and on her promise to do nothing
more to disturb the peace, she was not re-
quired to pay the fine.
~