The herald., 1897-03-28
Will the District Attorneys
Office Explain?
CAUSE OF LONG DELAY
MAYBURY's EFFORTS TO Sc
CURE JUSTICE
Frequent Calls Made With Little
Result--Nearly Month to Get
Battery Complaint

| District Attorney James that there had
been any delay in the issuing OF the COM
plant in the battery charge against s.
H. vinnelle, the ex-deputy constable
charged by William Maybury with as
saulting him on the 18th of August. 1886,
and which case was only tried In the po-
lice court on Thursday last. Maybury
has written a letter to The Herald In
which, after reviewing the ciroum-
stances of the assault. he says:
ION the day after the attack went
with my attorney to the police court to
get complaint, but as Mr.. James was
busy with trial before a jury and as I
was feeling very sick went home, after
making arrangements with my attorney
to go to Mr.. James office the next day.
which did and laid my case before him.
asking vthat a complaint be Issued for an
assault upon me with deadly weapon.
a revolver. James said he could not give
me complaint on my own and wife's
evidence alone. He asked whether any
one else had seen the ARRAY. told him
that the truckInen who were removing
the furniture from the house at 903 South
Olive street. which was the cause of the
said that II would get their names he
would investigate the matter.
II went again to my attorney, who
procured the names and gave them to
Mr.. James that same day, Aug. H. 1896.
After that waited in vain to hear Of the
arrest of Vinnelle being made. Finally,
on the morning of Sept. Sth / again went
to him and he told me to call again at
1880 D. M, when he would give me the
complaint. At that time he fulfilled his
promise and issued the document, but
instead of giving me one for assault with
a deadly weapon he merely charged
Vinnelle with assault and battery, say
ing that 1t amounted to the same thing.
/ swore to the complaint in Justice Nor
rison's court the same day. To the clerk
of the court l gave Vinnelle's address,
217 New High street. told him the de-
fendant was deputy constable in the
township court, and he replied that it
would be all right and the arrest would
be made.
Some two months after this I was in
the township court and there saw Vim
nellie. / went several times to the court
house and the police station to see WHY
the arreet had not been made, but got no
satisfaction. In January laid the mat
ter before the grand jury, then in ses-
sion. On Feb. 9th saw the foreman of
the jury, who returned to me the papers
embodying the evidence l had laid be
fore them, and said that they had been
instructed by the district attorneys
nfHff E nat Mka no ,a.i9tion in the matter
assault upon me Investigated, ,whereupon
he sent to the district attorneys office
and Mr.. Holton came down.
Mr. Holton examined the papers and
I was called into the grand jury room
and questioned. Mr.. James was also
summoned and said that he remembered
me, but recollected little or nothing of
the case. After he had once issued the
complaint he had nothing more to do
with a case until 1t came to trial. He
advised me to go and see Mr.. Stockwell.
the new clerk of Judge Morrisons court,
and get him to hunt up the warrant.
There I found that the records showed
that the warrant had been issued the
same day the complaint was sworn out,
September 8, 1896, but no trace of the for
mer document could be found. On IN
forming Mr.. James of this, he wrote
request to Mr.. Stockwell to issue an
alias warrant. I again asked that the
warrant be issued for assault with
deadly weapon, to which he again re-
piled that 1t made no difference, as the
allegation of violence in the battery
complaint would cover the same ground.
The alias warrant was issued on Feb
ruary 9, and then came another wait.
ION the 10Th of March went to CHIEF
of Police Glass 10 see why Vlniieiie hdu
not been arrested. He found that the
warrant had remained unserved-because
his officers had been unable to locate
Vinnelle. told him that the latter had
been seen in the city on the 18th. where
upon he ordered a fresh search to be
made. which finally resulted in Vinnelle's
giving himself into custody when he
heard that he was wanted. and the trial
occurred"
At the trial Dictrict Attorney James
excused himself from appearing; the
prosecution being represented by Judge
I. Noonan Phillips Deputy District At
torney Willis appeared as witness for
the defense Where the missing war
rant went to is unknown-possibly w.
w. Everett, the absconding police court
clerk. could tell. Neither the police nor
Constable Johnston's office have any
record of its delivery to them and 1t
simply dropped out of sight. That there
was delay in issuing the complaint on
the part Of the district attorneys ofi1ce
is shown by the above statement and
that it resulted from Mr.. James tactics
seems shown The subsequent loss Of the
warrant and failure to arrest cannot be
laid at any ones door until It Is known
who had the warrant. Decision In the
case was to have been rendered by JUS
tice Morrison yesterday, but the matter
was postponed until Monday when Vim.
nellie will hear the judgment OF the
arrrf