The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1894-08-25

unreasonable under the circumstances.
1t was only proper to grant certain time
Ee would grant a continuance, but in the
meantime he thought that the deposition
could be translated. the case could go on
though If Mr.. Rubens would waive the
defect in the dispositions.
After consulting with Ezeta and Attor-
ney Quezada Mr.. Rubens said they would
not waive the defects.
The question of who would 90 the trans
lating then came up. Thomas Jewett,
clerk of the District Attorney, was named,
but he declined 10 do the work on personal
grounds. He was willing to see that il
was done correctly. though. The deposit
tions were then given him for examina-
ton.
Mr.. Rubens had another proposition to
lay before the court. and that was the
matter Of bail. He contended that it was
usual in such cases to accept BAIL There
was only one case on record where bail had
been refused. He quoted the cases of
Hamilton and Jefferson Davis, both ac-
cused of high treason, where bail had
been taken. There was no express pro-
vision of the United States statute pro-
hibiting admission 10 bail. In the Penal
Code of California there is a provi sion
permitting admission TO bail in extradition
cases until the time of hearing.
Il. B. Mitchell, Mr.. Persons associate,
opposed the application. The State statute
applied only 90 interstate cases. and no I to
extradition relation with foreign coun-
tries. Again, if the defendants were ad-
United to bail, and il was decided to send
them back to San Salvador. the Govern
ment would be placed in a very embar-
martial exiies had jumped the country
In such an event the United States could
not live I'D 10 the treaty. The defendants
were not being tried under regular crimi-
nal proceedings, but under the treaty.
Judge Morrow cOncurred in this latter
view, but said he would withhold a deci-
sion until he had looked up the auth critics.
Attorney Rubens again arose to submit
a new point, and strong one, he thought.
in the case. He wanted it to 60 on record
that he objected TO the jurisdiction of the
court The defendants had been brought
here against their will. and the warrants
had not been legally served. The Govern
ment had brought the defendants here
forcibly against their will.
We'll. there is nothing before the court
whereby that can be determined" re-
marked Judge Morrow.
"Oh, ] know" replied Mr.. Rubens. 81
only made the statement so that it may go
on record"
THE only thing before the court" said
the Judge, lis the return of the Marshal
that they were found in the jurisdiction of
the court"
A recess was taken until p NJ.
In the afternoon Mr. Jewett informed
the court that it would lake at least a
week to translate the deposition. He was
then sworn in TO see that true and cor
rect translation was made. Judge Morrow
said In regard to the bail that he had
looked into the matter and had concluded
that he must be guided by the provisions
OF the treaty. He could find no act of
Congress providing for bail III such case.
Hence the defendants could not be bailed.
Mr.. Rubens then asked that if the Off
GERS on the Bennington who would tes-
tify for them, were compelled to leave be-
fore the time set for the hearing. arrange
ments could be made for taking their tes-
timony. He was assured that their testi
mOny could be taken.
Hearing of the case was then set fol
Monday SeDtem her 2 at II A NJ