The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1900-04-04
CONGRESS MAY INTERVENE
Continued from Eighth Page.)

reading of the special presentment of the
grand jury had been concluded Then
Judge Speer said: "In view of the gravity
and Importance of your presentment, 1
must beg that you will excuse me for
little while, that l may consider what rep
reservations or suggestions l should sub
nit 10 your thereon" With this Judge
Speer retired to his chambers and 1t was
something over half an hour later that he
re-entered the court room and began to
address the grand jury.
Il am quite sure he said, that your
special presentment relating to the delay
in the removal of the defendants Greene
and the Gaynors, indicted for consp'r a y
with Oberlin M. Carter, late United States
engineer is prompted by desire that they
should have that speedy and impartial
trial provided by the Constitution of the
United States for persons accused of
crime. l do not doubt that it is also
prompted by that scrupulous and patriotic
determination to see the laws of the
United States enforced which for many
years has marked the conduct of grant
jurors and Jurors in this district 1 am
sure that you do not mean in any sense to
PREJUDICE the question of the guilt or inno-
cence of the persons accused, or to preju
dice them when they are brought to the
bar of the court and the case against them
is submitted to trial jury.
THE rule upon the subject to which
your presentment relates, as understand
it, is that upon the production of a valid
indictment and proof of the identification
of the person accused it is proper for some
judicial officer of the United States, desig-
mated by the statutes, to issue an order
for the removal of the prisoner to the dis
trict in which he is indicted.
when 1 was officially informed of the
direction which this case was taking in
New York before the commissioner, on
Dec. 26 last, 1 promptly wrote the Presi-
dent, referring to his constitutional power
to take care that the laws be faithfully
executed and calling his attention to what
seemed to me in this case to be an inter
ference with that faithful execution, and
an instance of disregard of the lawful pro-
cess of the United States District Court,
which, if acquiesced in so that it would
become an established practice, would in
my judgment, entail most serious conse-
quences to the administration of justice
and the enforcement of the criminal laws
of the United States. 1 represented to the
President, and 1 quote from my letter, as
follows.
Wherever a grand jury of the United
States Court, having appropriate jurisdic-
ton, has investigated and found indict-
ment true, when that indictment is valid
and has been returned into court and filed
and the court itself has issued a bench
warrant in the name of the President
for the apprehension of the accused, 1t is
wholly unwarrantable for a United States
commissioner in another state to go behind
the indictment and to hold any judicial in
quiry into the facts which were submitted
to the grand jury, upon the faith of which
their action was taken. If 1t were other
wise the action of the grand jury would
have no more significance than that of
commissioner issuing a warrant on aft
davit; moreover, this procedure would
give a commissioner In one district of the
United States the authority to set aside
and nullify the solemn and deliberate act
ion of the grand jury in another district
1T is with much pleasure, gentlemen,
that / have to assure you that the Pres
ident promptly acted upon my letter and
Immediately referred ito to the personal
attention of the Attorney General and
advised me of that fact, and the Attorney
General directly INTERVIEWED, through his
subordinate law officers, and as you state
in your preSentments, has done all in his
power to cause the removal of the parties
accused, so that they may be held to
answer in the language of the constitu-
ton, for the crime with which they are
indicted. 1t is also true, | am inform
ed, that the commissioner did not go be-
hind the indictment 20 hear evidence, but
consumed more than two months in al
lowing the prisoners counsel to offer
proof.
with regard to the subsequent delay to
which you refer, which has ensued before
his honor, the honorable Addison Brown,
Judge of the district court, l have to say
that we are bound to presume that this
must result from the great accumulation
of business which exists always in the
United States Courts n our great metrop-
oils. Judge Brown is widely known to be
a learned and conscientious judge. L am
quite sure however, that if he had APP
hal .rea c=
this court which has resulted in the delay
and the danger to the proper trial of the
accused the great hardship upon one of
the prisoners, Michael A. Connolly, who
Immediately after the indictment was
brought from Cuba to answer the charge
against him and who since then, without
resource has been here awaiting his trial,
ana especially the possibility of serious
reproach to the administration of the law
in these courts to which your present.
ments refer, 1 am quite sure the learned
and conscientious judge would have found
some means to expedite the determination
of the matter pending before him and
would have reached a decision in accord
ance with his conceptions of the law.
"In your accommodation to Congress
I do not hesitate to give my hearty con-
curreuce If the judicial Interpretation of
the statutes and the common law Justl1es
the practice of going behind Vaild IN
dictment, found In another district, to as
certain If the facts show probable cause
for the action of the grand jury, certain
ly 1t would be salutary for Congress TO
amend Section 1014 Revised Statutes, so
as to provide in all cases that a certified
COPY of valid indictment found in the
United States Court having jurisdiction in
one district, when produced before the dis
trict Judge of another district, shall be
taken as conclusive evidence of sufficient
probable cause of guilt of the defendant
when he is identified as the person so in
dicted, for the purpose of arrest holding
to bail and for issuing warrants for
transportation in default of bail to appear
at the court in which the indictment is
found If this be not law, it is easily con-
ceivable. where we have forty-five dis
tinct territorial jurisdictions in the United
States, not to speak of the territories and
our other possessions that state lines
would become barriers to the enforcement
of-the United States laws, ana especially
would this be true where the persons ac-
cused of crime were men of influence and
poWer,'