Los Angeles herald., 1892-02-06
A Tangled Legal Fight At
San Pedro.
Justice Sweet and Attorney
Hogan At Daggers' Points.
An indefinite Commitment for Con-
tempt Puzzles the Sheriff.
A Prisoner Abandoned by Constables
Who Wanted Someone to Take
Him Into Custody-An Af-
terpiece to a Row in
Niger Browns.

There was an interesting legal tangle
in the sheriff's Office yesterday, and all
of the learned pundlts of the lower
court were in a state of excitement
thereanent. AT O'Clock Constables
Potter and Truman put in an appear
ance at the county Jail with Attorney
Thomas j. Hogan in custody. The COM
mitment was made out by Justice B. G.
Sweet of Wilmington township, and
fined Hogan $40 and called for his
committal, but did not stipulate where
he should be committed or for how long.
When Jailer Pallett read the commit
ment he refused to accept the prisoner.
Hogan was then taken over to the sher-
ifs office, and the two constables then
announced that they would have moth
ing further to do with him,
and the sheriff's Office refused
to receive him. Finally, after searching
the records and consulting legal
advisers it was decided to let Hogan go
on his own recognizance and appear in
court this morning and apply for writ
of habeas corpus.
Attorney Hogan's story is an Interest,"
ing one, illustrative of the methods OF
rural Jurisprudence. He states that a
row occurred in Niger Browns
place at "Stingareetown," San Pc
dro, in which a man named john
ston was badly cut. Soon afterward
John Matthews and woman named
Lizzie Ruiz were arrested by Justice
Johnston's officers for alleged complieity
in the cutting affray. This arrest, it is
lo
On Sunday morning an officer from
Justice Sweets Office got Matthews out
of the San Pedro calaboose, saying that
Justice Johnston's officers had no right
to arrest him without warrant.
against Johnston, charging him with
mayhem, alleging that during the affray|
on Saturday night Johnston had badly.
chewed one of his ears. Attorney Ho-l
gan was employed to defend Johnston,
and when he went to the justice the lat
ter said he would not issue warrant
until after the preliminary examination
of Matthews. When Matthews came
up for trial hewas discharged.
At IL O'Clock yesterday Attorney
Hogan went to see Justice Sweet and
found him in his back yard mending a
pump. He asked why no warrant had
been issued, and the justice said that
the Matthews suit had been dismissed.
The attorney remarked that the justice
knew as much about the case after it
had been discussed as he did when the
complaint was made. He then
walked into the justice's Office with
that functionary and asked to
see the docket, but alleges that
Justice Sweet refused to let him see it.,
and finally threw him out of the office.
Later he was arrested for contempt OF
court, the justice making the charge
against Hogan before himself (Sweet).
When Hogan asked for time to prepare
his defense he claims the justice held as
follows: "The court in this matter is
arbitrary, and desires to force you to
make an immediate answer"
The Justice then fined him $40 and
committed him, but no time or place is
designated in the commitment, SO that
Hogan might be placed in jail some
where for an indefinite time as far as
the commitment is concerned. 1t now
remains to be seen what Justice Sweet
has to say in the premises.