The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1892-01-20
CHILEAN JUSTICE.
Final Report Of the Judicial
Officer.
Result Of the Investigation at Valparaiso
Of the Baltimore Outrage.
American Sailors to Blam8-HeaVy Sentence
of Sailor DaVidsOn-NOminaI ImpriS-
Onment 10 the ChiIe3lS.
Copyrighted 1892 by the Press publishing Company

New YORK, Jan. 10.-The Worlds special
from Valparaiso via GalvestOn) says: 1t
is true that the Chilean Government notified
Captain Evans of the Yorktown that il was
unable to guarantee the safety of the
refugees on board his ship if he undertook
to transfer them to any departing steamers,
and neither could the Government prevent
any steamer on which they took passage
from being searched in any Chilean port at
which the vessel might touch while on the
way north. There was no change Of mind
on the part of the Chilean authorities in
regard to the refugees. In proof of this it
is only necessary to look at the facts as
presented by the following statement from
a high authority and it is claimed that the
Government was p0werless in the premises ::
The Government has no right under the
constitution of the country to interfere with
the courts or public prosecutors and could
not prevent the seizure of the refugees in
any port of Chile they touched at on the
way in any direction to a neutral port"
This plain and direct statement Of the law
and facts should put at rest the notion, If
any such exists, that the surrender of the
refugees to the American authorities had a
stout tight string att .ched to it.
THE BALTIMORE DECISION.
The report of the Prccurator Fiscal to the
Judge Of Crimes in the Baltimore affair has
been given to the public and there has been
time to examine it. This document con-
tains eight thousand words, and says that
efforts were directed from the first to ascer-
tain the origin of the trouble, but they were
unavailng. Several different accounts of
the affair were received. The Commandant
of Police states that the row began in some
unknown tavern In one part of the city.
Another witness says it began by American
sailors beating a Chilean sailor in an alto
gether different part of the town. The Chill
can police say it began with fight between
a left-handed Chilean sailor aud an Ameri-
can, and last of all the incident has been Te.
ported as having been commenced by some
Chileans splitting in the faces of two Ameri-
can sailors in the street. A crowd near by
was waiting to attack them should they re-
sent the insult, so it was said at the time.
The Baltimore's men took refuge on a
street-car, but the crowd stopped the car,
hauled the men out, beating them with
sticks and stones and knitting them.
THE BEGINNING OF THE TROUBLE.
The PCocutor Fiscal has accepted the
story that the trouble began with the resent
ing by the Americans of the splitting in their
faces. For all that my information leads
me 10 believe that the attack broke out SIM
ultaneousy in different parts Of the city,
as charged in President Harrison'o message.
This is denied by the Chieans, and the Pro-
curator closes the introduction of his report
by asserting that the fight owes its origin to
two drunken Baltimore sailors striking a
Chilean sailor. He then recounts the list of
the injured and says: 1T has only been pos
sible to establish the culpability Of four
men" The testimony of James Johnson
and Charles Langin, two of the Baltimore'S
crew whose testimony was taken here. was
rejected in the following language; "How
Is IL If, as johnson depOSes, they left the
house together and went together TO the
scene of the occurrence; 1t results that
they did not know each other, nor had they
spoken tn each other until they met at the
scene of BOatSwain's Mate Higgins death /?
How is that before knowing Langin he de-
poses that the day of the occurrence they
were dining together in a clearinghouse?
johnson also says that on the day of the
occurrence he dined together with Langn
over, is it possible that the act of raising
wounded man and knowing if he walks or
not could pass unobSeTved under such or
any other circumstances? The conclusion
drawnis is thatthe persons who indulge In such
inconsistencies are not worthy of belle"
He says further that their testimony is con-
tradicted by that of numerous witnesses,
which fully proves that 1t is not possible 10
attribute Higgins death to the police, but
that it was the work Of some unknown per-
son thus far undetected.
SHOT BY SOLDIERS.
| will add that the testimony of numer-
Gus other witnesses is as full of incOnsiSt-
encies as is that of johnson and Langin.
Further, their testimony confirms much of
Johuson's and Langn'S. such as the rising
of Rlggin, his calling for liquor, holding Rig
gins head on JOhnSOn's shoulder. hearing
shots, etc, but no one testiiies who fired the
shot. Langin's testimony is substantially
this: When Rlggin rose the first time two
policemen came up. They drew short
swords and knocked him down again, then
stood back and let the crowd beat him.
AfteTwaTd a squad of soldiers approached
and marched by twO5 under the command
of mounted officer. They marched to
within six feet from where johnson was
holding Riggin in his arms. There they
halted and tie first two soldier leveled
their rifles and fired at the two American
sailors. II was about fifteen feet off on one
side" continued Laugin. 'NO one was be-
tween me and them, the crowd being back
of the soldiers at that moment. No other
shots were fired by any one. l distinctly
saw the soldiers level their rifles at the Bal
timore's men and fire. The crowd had
drawn back when the soldiers came up,
leaving a clear passage between Riggiu and
the soldiers. After the first shot was fired
the soldiers pressed forward little and |
could not see the second man who fired, but
- Df ha div,rr cold 1f.,r,
who fired" As many witnesses exist who are
ready to say the shot was fired By the police
as there are that deny it.
THE BULLET HOLES.
Then follows the report of an expert on
the bulet-hole. He says: "Opinion is di-
vided on this point among the doctors still,
and while they assert the opinion that it
was caused by ii rife ball, it is rejected be-
cause they give no reason for their Opn-
ion." Drs. Cavallo aud Calderon maintain
they cannot tell If the bullet caused Rig
gins death. and give as reason that they
saw the body the day after death. This is
accepted. Two Chilean experts express
the opinion that the holes in his shirt may
have been made by large-siZe revolver.
but can give no opinion as to what caused
the holes in the neckerchief. Lieutenant
McCIee expressed the same opinion, but
says the hole in the shirt was caused by a
rifle bullet. He made a strong point of the
fact that the report Of the fitearm was so
Slight, notwithstanding the evidence that
there was a great tumult in the street. The
evidence is conf citing as to whether one or
two shots were fired.
REJECTING THE EVIDENCE.
The Procurator tries to make a strong
point in the following language IN order to
demonstrate the falsty of the assertion of
johnson ana Langn "Those men bring to
mind a number of incidents which admit Of
no other course but to reject their evidence
Johnson deposes that he had Higgins head
on his breast when two shots were fired on
the group formed by them, and they pro-
duce as proof q neckerchiei aud a sailors
shirt pierced by bullet. Ii this had been
so is it possible that rifle ball, which can
perforate several persons, would not have
touched him? Ii what they assert be true
they ought to have exhibited the blood