Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1896-09-05
THE CAUSE CELEBRE,
Further Proceedings Before the Ter
ritOrial Supreme Court In the
BOrregO Gang Cases.
EARNEST ARGUMENTS NOW IN PROGRESS
Should All Other Means Fail Attor.
neys for the Prisoners Will
Try for Writ of Habeas
Corpus.

The New MEXICAN yesterday recorded
the fact that, on motion of Solicitor Gen
eral Victory, the New Mexico supreme
court had set aside it's former decree af-
firming the Judgment of the court below
in the case of Francisco Gonzales Bor-
rego ct al, plaintiffs in error, vs. The
Territory of New Mexico, defendant in
error, on the grounds that the record as
sent up from the trial court failed to show
the fact that the four condemned plain
tiffs in error we're formally arraigned be.
fore their trial was commenced.
In the same connection it was also
shown in these columns yesterday that,
at the suggestion and request of the
solicitor-general, the supreme court or
dered writ Of certiorari to be directed
to the clerk of the district court COM
handing him forthwith to send up to
said supreme court full, true and com
plete transcript of the proceedings had
in said district court in said cause touch
ing the matter of the arraignment of the
said defendants before the beginning of
the trial of said cause.
Pending the preparation of this writ OF
certiorari and the time necessary con.
sumed in complying Herewith the court
took recess till p. m.
At p. m. yesterday Chief Justice
Smith and Associate Justices Collier and
Bantz resumed their places on the bench
and
THE AMENDED RECORD
of the district court, distinctly show.
ing the fact of the arraignment of the
said four defendants before their trial be
gan, was presented in obedience to the
writ of certiorari above mentioned.
Mr.. F. W. Clancy, who had previously
announced his connection with the case al
the request of Mr.. Oatron, thereupon pro
tested against the action sought to be
taken on the ground that when the cast
came before the supreme court on wri
of error it passed entirely out of the jur
isdiction of the lower court until such
time as it might be remanded for new
trial and that hence the district cour
possessed
NO POWER TO AMEND OR CORRECT
the records that had originally beef
sent up.
Mr.. CLANCY further contended that, il
no event, could Judge Laughlin have par
ticipated in amending the record in thi
particular case ON account of the fact o
his having been one of counsel agains
the defendants at their preliminary hear
ing.
He also represented that there was nc
error in the original record sent up tt
correct as the defendants had not beef
arraigned before trial as it was nov
sought to be shown by the proposed
amendment.
These and the other representations h,
made to the court were founded on ani
supported by lengthy affidavit of Mr.
Catron with the affidavits of Mr.. Spiess
Mr.. Fl. s. CLANCY and the four defendants
attached.
Mr.. CLANCY then gave notice that in thu
course of the proceedings before Judg,
Laughlin wherein the alleged error in thu
record was sought to be corrected, coun
sci for the defendants had offered numer
GUS objections to the rulings of Judg,
Laughlin in the premises, had insisted or
these exceptions being noted, and thai
the same had been made part of the rec
| ord in the form of
BILL OF EXCEPTIONS
signed by Judge Laughlin. He contend
ed that, if the court concluded to con
| slider any part of the so-called amended
record sent up, he should ask for another
writ of certiorari requiring the clerk Of
the district court also to send up the bill
of exceptions.
The hour of 6 O'Clock having arrived
the chief justice announced that the court
would take recess until 8 O'Clock this
morning, when counsel on both sides
must be present at once to proceed te
the work of disposing CT the question al
Issue and they must do so as briefly al
possible.
Solicitor General Victory announced
that District Attorney Crist would assist
him in presenting the side of the terri
tory.