The San Francisco call., 1895-12-29
WILL OPEN MANY CELLS
Judge BahrS Decides It Is Not a
Crime to Garry Burglars
Tools.
An Important Superior Court Decision
That Seems to Be Contrary to
Federal Law.

Judge Bahrs' decision releasing James
Gleason from the penalty imposed upon
him in the Police Court for having burg
lars tools IN his possession, if sustained
by the Supreme Court. will be the means
of opening many Jail and prison door
throughout the State. 1t will also place
one more obstacle in the path of the police
department and make the way of the
house-breaker far safer.
Judge Bahrs yesterday decided that the
law making it a crime to have burglars
tools in ones possession is unconstitu-
tional and void.
This was in the case of James GIea.
son who was tried before Judge Low on a
charge of having burglars tools in his pos
session, and on his conviction Judge Low
sentenced him to six months imprison-
ment in the County Jail. A. B. Treadwell,
his attorney, secured writ of habeas cor
pus from Judge Bahrs, and upon that writ
he has been released.
The law under which Gleason was ar
rested makes it a crime for man to be
found with burglars tools in his posses
sion unless he can prove they came to him
honestly, and that he has no intention of
putting them to their peculiar and illegal
use. This state of things, Judge Bahrs
ruled, is unconstitutional because it re-
verses the statutory presumption that a
man is innocent until he is proved guilty,
and also that it throws the burden of proof
of innocence upon the defendant instead
of the burden of proof of guilt upon the
State.
The law is the same as that making the
possession of lottery tickets and the pos
session of gamb bling implements crime,
and they are all claimed to be unconstitu-
tional for the same reason.
Local authorities differ on this subject,
many OF them holding that Judge Bahrs'
decision is wrong and in direct conflict
with the Federal law which makes the
bare possession of counterfeit coin or bills
or counterfeiting casts and dies crime.
Many of them deplore Judge Bahrs' de-
cision, and express the hope that the Su-
preme Court will not sustain his view of
the law.
Notwithstanding Judge Bahrs' decision,
or perhaps in ignorance of it, Judge
Joachimsen yesterday reconsidered his
previous view OF the same law and took
stand directly in opposition to the Su-
perior Court decision. This was in the case
of Charles H. Davis, the well-known burg
lar, who was dismissed by Judge Joach-
lmsen on Wednesday on the charge of
having burglars tools in his possession,
and was rearrested on the same charge,
and who was yesterday sentenced by Judge
Joachimsen to six months in the County
Jail.
The Judge dismissed the first case on
the misconception that recent decision
of the Supreme Court. holding that in the
case of man arrested for having lot
terry tickets in his possession it must be
shown that he had them for an unlawful
purpose, applied to a man charged with
having burglars tools in his possession.
The Police Department was amazed at
the decision of the Judge, and on the con-
sequences of his action being called to his
attention he satisfied himself that he was
wrong. Now Davis attorney will apply
for writ of habeas corpus for his release
on the plea of once in jeopardy.
The Police Department has recently had
considerable trouble in convicting persons
caught carrying or manufacturing burg
lars tools, and Chief Crowley has de-
termined to break up such practices by
getting more strict police regulations
passed to cover the case. Tu that end he
sent the following communication to the
Board of Supervisors yesterday:
To the Board of uperuisors-GENTLEMEN: To
enable this department to successfully cope
with certain class of criminals who infest
this City, l respectfully request that section
of order No. 1887 be amended to read as fol-
lows:
lars tools.
A person who makes or mends or causes to
be made or mended, or has in his possession,
in the day or night time, any engine. machine,
tool, false key pick lock, bit, nippers or imple-
ments adopted, designed or commonly used for
the commission of burglary, larceny or other
crime, under circumstances evincing an in