Evening journal., 1893-02-15


Obstruct the Public Justice by spiriting
Away witness. Though not yet Recog-
nized, the BrIbers are Indictable.
Chief Justice Robinson's able decision
ON the motions made in the case VS..
Spring and Horner, for spiriting away a
witness has aroused much interest from
the fact that it has established a prece-
dent Ia such cases. The decision as de.
lvered by the court was as follows:
State New Castle County,
vs.. Feb'y T., 1898. (Trial
John ]. Horner Being No S3 to Nov.
and T., 1892.
John T. Spring Ind: Attempt TO Oh.
struct Public Justice.
Robinson, c. J. TUESDAY morning Feb'y
14)
Gentlemen We are now ready TO
deliver our opinion upon the motion
made yesterday by Mr.. Ward, but before
doing so it will be necessary for us TO
revive the facts which under this motion
must he accepted as proved.
On or about the Goth day Of June last
one James w. Horner was chargad
before the Municipal Court Of this city
with selling intoxicating liquors to Jerry
Sullivan, a minor, and was then re-
quired to, and do enter into recogniz-
ance ''to be and appear before the next
court Of the peace and Jail delivery TO be
held in Wilmington in and for New
Castle county" there to answer said
charge. At the same time Jerry Sulli-
van, the minor to whom the liquor was
alleged to have been sold by said James
w. Horner, also entered into a
recognizance to appear at said
court, as stated therein "as witness Ia
the case OF the state Of Delaware vs.
James w. Horner, selling liquors TO
minors The September term was then
the next term Of the Court of General
Sessions for this county, and Jerry Sulli
van in compliance with the terms Of his
recognizance appeared at the court and
testified before the Grand Jury, and upon
his testimony with that Of others, true
bill of indictment was found against
said James w. Horner for the offense Of
selling liqnor to said Jerry Sullivan, a
minor.
The case was not tried at that term,
but was continued to the November
term. At the November term James w.
Horner pleaded guilty to the indictment.
But in the meantime, as Jerry Sullivan
says. and what he says must at this time
be taken as true, he, at the suggestion
Of Charles II. Clayville, police officer in
this city. met John j. Horner one Of the
defendants. at Eleventh and Kirkwood
streets, in this city, on Wednesday the
10Th Of November, being the Wednesday
before the court which began on Monday,
the 21st.
Horner asked him if he had anything
against jim He answered, mo; have
nothing against Jim" "Well, said
Horner, Chow would you like to make it
easy on him" and asked him how he
would like to 60 away until after court,
and said, Then go away until after this
November court is over. Witness said
did not know; he was under bail. They
then parted after making an engage
ment to meet there that night. In the
evening John T. Spring, the other de-
fendant. met witness instead of John j..
Horner, and went with him to Homer s
barber shop in this city. There Horner
called him aside and said in a whisper,
Jerry, did you make up your mind yeti
Witness said no he had not made up his
mind. Horner said to him, Il will give
You S25 90 to 90 away until after court
and said, when you are away you
write to me or Jim, IL you want any
Jim" the witness says he understood
John J. Horner's brother James w.
Horner To that offer the witness re.
piled "All right, but said also that he
didn't know. During the conversation
Horner asked Spring, when do the
warrants come out2' Spring said he
didn't know but that he would 60 up "a
the Court House and find out. Then
John T. Spring, one Of the defendants
and witness left the barber shop and
made an appointment to meet again al
Eleventh and Church at o'clock tn,
next evening, which would be Thursday
evening
They met at the time and Eplace ap
pointed and went to the depot, wher,
Spring gave witness two sums Of a
each and witness bought a ticket fol
Philadelphia and left for that city an,
New York. In consequence of a messagl
he received while in New York witness
came back to this city on Monday, reach
ing here Monday evening, and appearing
in the court room on Tuesday morning
The state insists that by establishing
these facts they have proved the offens
of obstruoting public justice by persuad
ing q witness to absent himself, and tha
the defendants are guilty in manner an
form as they stand indicted
But Mr. Ward has requested us Z
direct the jury to return verd ct of no
guilty. because, he says, at the time o
the solicitation Jerry Sullivan was
neither bound by recognizance TO appear
nor was he under subpoena to appea
His contention is that in order to con
stitute the offepse Of spiriting away
witness the party persuaded must hav'
been summoned or recognized TO appear
Such Cases Punishable az Grimes.
The learned counsel does not deny tina
the offense Of spiriting away witnes
is an indictable offense at common Law
It was early recognized as being abso
lutely essential to the existance Of court
and their efficiency in performing tn
functions for which they were create
that such offenses against them shoulS
be punishable as crimes The grea'
object of their existence is ascertain.
Thousands of Dollars