The San Francisco call., 1896-11-14

been presented to the Governor. It is the
case of a boy. Ramon Herrera, who with
his friends and relatives asserts that he is
entirely innocent of the crime of robbery
of which he was convicted and for which
he was sentenced to serve twenty years
imprisonment among the felons and
rogues at San Quentin.
The court records show that in the
latter part of 1898 a Ch1naman named
Leong Tom was assaulted and robbed
after midnight by two masked footpads.
who took from him his gold watch and
$25. Isador Baldivia, Ramon Herrera
and Manuel Portillio were arrested for the
crime.
Baldivia pleaded guilty to the charge
and was sentenced to twenty years i'm
prisonment. Herrera protested that he
was innocent, and his mother and two
sisters testified that the boy, then II years
of age, was at home and in bed at the
time of the robbery.
However, the victim positively identi-
fed the lad as one of the assailants, not
withstanding that he said the robbers
wore masks over their faces. Por.illo was
acquitted for all that the police recovered
the Chinaman's watch from pawnshop,
where it had been pawned by Portilio,
who skipped off 10 Mexico as soon as he
was released. Portillo's liberty did him
but little good, for he was since shot to
death while attempting to holdup train
near Guaymas.
All OF this time Herrera's relatives and
friends have been hunting for evidence to
prove the innocence of the bov, and now
they claim to have all the proof necessary
to establish this as a fact. His friends
are numerous and influential, and those
who are the deepest interested are among
the best citizens of this CITY. They desire
not to be known. but among them is one
who, although an attorney, is handling
the case purely in the interest of Justice.
He is Addison Z. Shaw of sos Montgom-
cry street.
From NJ. Shaw the inside facts were
learned, which. in substance are these
The boy, Ramon Herrera. was industrious
and always gave his widowed mother all
that he earned. On the night of the rob-
berry the Lad was in bed. Herrera dressed
similar to Portillo, who did not bear the
best of reputation, although he was of
good family. When the lad was arrested
he wished to shield his family from dis
grace, and gave the name of Charles
Garcia.
His first sad experience was with sew
eral Police Court practitioners, who took
all the money that the family could raise
and then neglected to project their client.
and took no pains to bring out the evil
dence that would have secured his acou1t-
tai. Even on the trial Baldivia testified
that Herrera was an innocent person. and
that it was another man who assisted in
robbing the Chinaman. Why so little at
tention was paid to the fact that the
Chinaman's watch had been pawnea bv
Portilo could never be learned. The boy
was convicted solely upon the testimony
of the Chinaman.
Shortly after the trial Baldivia repented
and swore to the statement that he had
N ade upon the wltness-stapd that Herrera
was innocent. 1t was not until Portillo
was well out of the State that he gave his
accompice's name. In concluding his
deposition Baldivia says:
The foregoing statement has been made by
me orally In Police Court at the time of nv
preliminary examination, to the Judge of said
court, to my attorney, A. B. TresdwelI and
since then 10 the Deputy Sheriffs in the
County JAIL and TO the family of said Charles
Garcia (the name under which he was sem
tenced). have done so and do so now as an
act OF justice TO said Charles Garcia and in the
hope tnat an innocent man may be vindicated
The said robbery was committed by Manuel
PortiIlo and myself IsADoR BALDIvIA
This Is not the only evidence in the DOS.