The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-01-08
sUPREME CoURr AcTIoN.
Petition of Durrant's Attorney Denied
at 1903 O'Clock in the Afternoon.

AT lsOo 'ClOck IN the AFTERNOON.
WASHINGTON, Jan THE United
States Supreme Court at three minutes past
1 o'clock to-day. entered it's final decision
in the case William Henry Theodore Dur
rant, refusing to interfere The matter
was before the court on an application
made by attorney Louis P. Boardman for
leave to file petition for a writ of habeas
corpus in Durrant's behalf. This applica-
tion was only made by Mr.. Boardman after
he had exhausted all other resources in the
shape of individual members of the court
After seeing Justices Brewer ard Harlan
last night he called on Justice Shras before
the convening of court, but met with the
same denial from him which he had re-
ceived at the hands of the other Justices
He saw Mr. Shras at his residence and to
him presented his petition for appeal from
the decisions of the California courts in
brief form. Without going into the merits
of the case Justice Shras denied the APP
pication in both cases.
After this proceeding Mr.. Boardman had
no time left to see other individual justices,
and he went to the courtroom with the in
tenton of presenting the matter to the con-
gregated court. He presented personal
petition in his own name in Durrant's be-
half rather than to appear as the latters
counsel. To appear in the latter role it
would have been necessary for him to Sc
cure admission to the bar. and the proceed
ing would have required time which Mr.
Boardman felt that he could ill afford TO
lose, In presenting the petition he had the
undivided attention of the entire court, all
the members Of which were present except
Justice Brewer, and of an audience which
filled all the seats and the standing room
in the portion of the hall outside the bar
Mr.. Boardman lost no time in presenting
his prayer to the court. Two or three per-
sons were admitted to practice, and the
words of the oath administered to them
had scarcely fallen from the lips of Clerk
McKenney when the California attorney
moved swiftly from the rear of the bar in
closure to the front. where he calmly took
his position and began his presentation of
the matter in hand.
Mr.. Boardman began his address to the
court by saying that he realized that his
method of presenting the case as a per-
scnal petition of his own was outside of the
usual line of habeas corpus proceedings in
this court. He briefly outlined the fact that
Durfant was under sentence Of death on the
charge of murder in California, and that
the execution had been set to take place to-
day Il appear" he said. lin person in
behalf Of my client, who is confined in
prison in California, and who. because of
this restraint. is unable to make petition in
his own behalf" He then proceeded to read
his petition at length. presenting the points
which he had hitherto presented TO the in
dividual justices of the. court. making APP
plcation for an appeal from the decision Of
the United State Circuit Court for the
Northern district of California. and for a
writ of error to the State Supreme Court
of California. with hope of thus getting
the matter in this court and securing a
stay of proceedings in the matter of Dur
rants execution by obtaining order for
a writ of habeas corpus. He also set forth