The San Francisco call., 1897-10-24
Judge HanfOrd Clears
Accused Federal
Officials.
Lewis and Gardner Cannot
Ee Prosecuted by State
Authorities
They VIII lot BE Held on the Charee
Of Robb ry Preferred by the
Notorious Yea Gee.
Special Dispatch to The CALL

SEATTLE, WASH, Oct. 23.-"W he re
there is no ground ior criminal charge
under the laws OF Washington. the Fed
eral court will protect Fe!eral officers
against prosecution for acts done under
color of authority in the performance of
official duties. The statement that these
men can be sent to the State Penitentiary
under conviction for robbery is an alb
surdity."
In these words, delivered in the course
OF his decision in the application of Spe-
cial Agent Lewis and Interpreter Gardner
for L writ OF hateas corpus, Ju ge Han
ford Today ordered. the release of the Off
GERS from the custody of ,he State ana
allowed them 10 90 without fear of being
interfered with by the State officers.
The order grant ng the writ OF habeas
corpus will be issued Monday requiring
the Deputy Sheriff of Jefferson County 10
release Gardner and Lewis. In fact both
men will be out of the city when the order
is issued, Lewis having gon East tonight
and Gardner being now on his way to CAL
ifornia.
The decision by Judge Hanford was
rendered at the close OF the hearing on
the application Of Glrdne- and Lewis for
a writ of habeas corpus. Both had been
arrested on charge OF robbery preferred
by Yee Gee, ex- x-CoEector Saunders former
Chinese interpreter, who had himself
been under ire of the Government
on the char &c Of cons piring TO land Chi
neSe immi i.rants in violation of the ex-
clusion act.
Judge Hanford's opinion in part is as
follow:
In deciding this case ! do not mean 10 say
that the warrant which Mr.. Keefer preferred
WAS law III warrant or at the proceedings
under II were well advised or proper proceed
ings. don I mean to say that the petitioners
were lawfully dlscharging official duties in
what they did.
In my opinion the warrant itself was i'm
providently and eTroneous.y issued aud the
proceedings were MI nl-adYised ana con-
ducled with bad judgment; but the fact Is
that the offirer who issued this warrant is an
officer OF the Cnlled States and given au-
thorlty 10 is ue warrants IN proper cases.
These petitioners were IN the service OF the
Government OF the L. tied Sia es and were
acting in aad about the matters that per-
tained 10 their duties as public officer. Now,
Where an officer, from an excess of zeal
mlsinform alton or lack of good Judgment
executes what he cOncetyes 10 be
the duties OF MS Office, but in an improper
manner, even where ne violates private rights
for conduct, he Is anwerable to the Govern
mont or the power under whose power ho Il
acting, and he may lay n mself liable to
answer 10 private individual who is Injured
or oppressed by Ais action, but he does not
lay himself liable TO answer TO the criminal
process OF different Government or a differ
ent sovere eighty. With the complex system Of
government we have, Safe and national
we wou,d b; in unstable condition
II the state government put in
force It's criminal laws to discipline
United States officers for the manner in which
they discharge their duties; or the other way,
ii the Cover ment OF the United States should
prosecute criminal y Sherffs and mi listerial
fficers and Justices OF the Peace and Superior
courts Tor errors OF judgment or ignorance or
biundering discharge OF their duties, 1t would
briug on a condition OF choas in short time.