The San Francisco call., 1898-07-26
THE CASE OF LOcHNER.

' HE inquisltorial method pursued blythe Chief ot Police of this city in detecting crime is wholly wrong and ought not to be longer tolerated Besides being illegal 1t is outrageous violation ot the principles of personal liberty. The method pre- valls in France and is pursued by the police authori ties of Russia, but other civilized nation in the world permits it-certainly none in which the per sonal rights of the citizen subject matter of concern to the Government. sworn warrant IS al most everywhere required as preliminary to incar- ceration, and it ought to be here
 Some days ago woman was stranged to death in Fourth-street lodging house No knows who committed the crime, but Chief Lees has determined that a miserable fellow named Lochner who roomed in the house shall be tried for it. In pursuance of his method o conVicting all persons whom he suspects, the Chief has placed Lochner in the tanks and sub Jected him to rigid crossexanlinaton. Denied the services of counsel, securely confined in dungeon, and compelled to undergo the searching tortures of
 the detectives, it is really wonder that the wretct has not broken down and confessed" the crime A weaker man might have done so. Even an acute man might have tangled himself up as to run the risk of term in prison
 Yet during his confinement no charge has been preferred against Lochner. He is just much titled to his liberty Mayor Phelan or the Chief of Police himself. He has simply been taken by force put in the tanks and held for days on suspicion of having committed a crime with which there IS no direct evidence connecting him. Had Chief Lees
 suspected" Auditor Broderck or Assessor Siebe of this crime there is why they might not have been subjected to similar treatment
 Perhaps Lochner is really the murderer of Mrs. Carpenter It is barely possible that the "sus- picions" of Chief Lees will in this case be verified We do to discuss the facts of this particular at all. The question we desire to ask is simply
 this: What authority has the Police Department for locking citizens up on suspicion and subjecting them to the torture Of one-sided cross-eXannation? Lochners liberty is just precious to him any other mans. If the Chief of Police can lock Lochner up suspicion he can lock Charles Webb Howard, William Alvord, E. B. Pond or any other citizen. All he need do in any is to send policeman after the victim and order him ncarcerated If this method of detecting crime in San Francisco IS to continue if the small book" and the tanks" are to be used in this for verifying the suspicious of the Chief of Poce-n short if Chief Lees is to con- tinue to be the supreme arbter of personal liberty hereabouts-it would be well to make his detective theories subject of legislative consideration At present he frames his rules" This power at least, should be taken from him.
 Personal liberty has been the jealous care of all ages. Millions of lives have been sacrificed in achieving it, century ago Sir William Blackstone said that the the power is left to any mags- trate "to imprison arbitrarily whenever he or his officers think proper Gas in France is daily practiced by the Crown) there will be an end of all other rights and immunities" This is as true to-day as then. Yet the custom of jang men without warrant of law prevails in this city How many persons have been arrested and detained on suspicion" by the Chief of Police during the past year2 That is ques- ton the Grand Jury should investigate Usually the Chief is careful to lock up only poor and friendes citizens. But this fact ought not to influence ac- quiescence in the custom. The Grand Jury should make the Chief show his "small book" and open the tanks" Nobody knows at this moment whom he has locked up on suspicion"