The record-union., 1898-01-08
DURRaMT HANGED
AT SAN QUENTIN.
CONTINUED from First Page.)

Quired time, which Mr.. Boardman felt
he could i'll afford to lose. In present.
ing the petition he had the UNDIVIDED
attention of the entire court, all the
members of which We're present eX-
cept Justice Brewer, and of an audience
which filed all the seats and the stand
ing room in the portion of the hall out
side the bar.
Mr. Boardman lost no time in pre-
senting his prayer to the court. Two
or three persons We're admitted to prac-
tice, and the words of the oaths adj
miniStered to them had scarcely fallen
from the lips of Clerk McKenny when
the California attorney moved swiftly
from the rear of the bar Enclosure to
the front, where he calmly took his po-
sition and began his presentation of
the matter.
He began by saying that he realized
that his method of presenting the case
as a personal petition of his own was
outside the usual line of habeas cor
pus proceedings in this court. He
briefly outlined the fact that Durrant
was under sentence of death on the
charge of murder in California, and
that the execution had been set for to-
day.
Il appear" he said, sin person in
behalf Of my client, who is confined in
prison in California, and who, because
of this restraint is unable to make Pc
tition in his own behalf"
He then proceeded to read his petition
at length, presenting the points which
he had hitherto presented to the indi-
viduat Justices, making application for
an appeal from the decision of the
United States Circuit Court for the
Northern District of California, and for
a writ of error to the State Supreme
Court of California, with a hope OF
thus getting the matter into this court
and securing stay of proceedings in the
matter of Durrant's execution by OBJ
tanning an order for a writ of habeas
corpus.
He also set forth his action in pre-
senting the matter to Justice Brewer
and other members of the court in their
individual character.
AS he proceeded Mr. Boardman was
frequently questioned by members OF
the court, whose questions were evil
IDENTIFY made for the purpose of eluci-
dating the points Mr.. Boardman sought
to present. He said in reply to a ques-
point in his application for an appeal
in the habeas corpus proceedings be-
fore the California Federal Courts was
his reliance upon his constitutional
right of appeal, which he claimed had
been denied by the refusal of the Cir
cult Court to grant this appeal.
He also claimed that the State court
by proceeding to sentence Durrant tO
execution November Sth last, before
the mandate of the United States SUI
preme Court refusing to grant a writ
OF habeas corpus had been received, vi
olated the Constitution and laws Of the
United States, and acted as a denial OF
the rights of his client.
Taking up the proceeding in the Cal
ifornia State Supreme Court, Mr.
Boardman detailed some of the errors
alleged to have been committed by the
court, closing with a presentation OF
the claim that the decision of the Fed
eral Supreme Court in the Jugiro case
left no question of the right to prose
cute an appeal in a similar case.
1t was then that Chief Justice Fuller
uttered a sentence which evidently fore
cast the decision of the court
I'VE decided in that case said the
Chief Justice, that the State courts
could proceed in such cases in the alb
sence of the mandate of this court
With this Mr. Boardman's presenta-
ton of the case closed, and the court
retired for consultation at 1928, re-
turning at :03 The crowd in the
court room remained.
The members had scarcely taken their
seats when the Chief Justice announced
the decision, saying: I'm the matter
of the application for writ of habeas
corpus in the case Of Theodore Durrant
the petition to file such application is
denied by the unanimous opinion of the
court"
Upon this announcement a majority
of the spectators filed out, and the
court took up other matters
Mr.. Boardman left with others, only
remarking that he had exhausted al
the resources at his command in the
interest OF his client.