The morning call., 1894-07-01
apainet Won

solyeney proceedings were Instituted
against you?"
Io.this question the counselor gave the
!olloWlng sage answer: "To this Ques-
uon the witness REPLIES that Alfred Clarke
Is not Dound to criminate himself. We
say tnat IN view of criminal proceedings.
Wnlch have been threatened and may be
taken against Alfred Clarke. this witness
is not bound to answer the question, and,
thtSrreIore, Alfred Clarke declines to say."
luis extraordinary answer suited neither
Warran OlneY nor Judge Levy, but neither
tureats nor expostulation were of any
aVali, as the counselor preserved his stub
porn silence. Finally Judge Levy became
exasDerated, and poor Nobby was once
more committed for contempt Of court.
Ihen came another round of writs of
habeas corpus. but in spite of the aged
counselor's tears and winks he was re-
manded in every case. At last Frank
Stone came TO his rescue again, and writ
of habeas corpus was taken out in the
Supreme Court, Chief Justice Beatty per-
mitting the counselor to be released on
bail. This writ was yesterday decided in
Clark'S favor, and his discharge ordered.
The court observes: Every debtor who
fraudulently removes his property or
effects out of this State. or fraudulenly
sells, conveys. assigns or coDceals his prop
erty with intent to defraud, hinder or de-
lay his creditors of their rights. claims or
demands, Is punishable by Imprisonment
in the County Jail not exceeding one year,
or by fine not exceeding $4,000, or by botn.
"lt is evident that any answers the petl
toner might have made tending to support
the allegations of the petition upon which
he was cited for examination would also
have had tendency to convict him of the
crime or public offense defined In the sec
ton quoted. and, therefore, he could not
be subjected to compulsory examination.
No person can be compelled in any GRIM
iOal case to be witness against himself.
TO bring person within the immunity
of this provision 1t Is not necessary that
the examination should be attempted in a
criminal prosecution against the witness
or that such a prosecution shall have been
commenced and actually pending. 1t is
sufficient il there is a law creating the Of
Tense under which the witness may be
prosecuted. Ii there is such law under
which the witness may be indicted or
otherwise prosecuted for a public offense
arising out of the acts to which the exam
ination relates he cannot be compelled TO
answer in any collateral proceeding unless
the law absolutely secures him against any
use in criminal prosecution of ths evil
! dence he may give. and this can only be
done by provision that If be submits to
the examination and answers the questions
he shall be exempt from any criminal pros
ecution for the offenSe to which the inquiry
relates.
"There is no law OF this State which
would have exempted the petitioner from
a criminal prosecution for fraudulent con-
cealment of his property if his answers to
the questions put to him had tended to
convict him of the offense; therefore. we
repeat. he could not be compelled to an
swer."
The decision is written by Chief Justice
Beatty and concurred in by Justices Nc
I 4 o.
route.
The counselor was up at the Supreme
! Court yesterday. bright and early. and
when he had read the decision he went
away with a self-satisfed smile and a
shake of the head. But. OD the contrary.
| Nobby's creditors are struck with dismay.
They are asking each other DOW, How
on earth are we now going to compel
N0bby to tell us what he has done with
mis- property" ?"