New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-05-05
HERRING on THE GRIGGS BILL
REMOVAL OF PERSONS TO DISTRICT WHERE
INDICTED OPPOSED.


Washington. May 4.-The House Judiciary Com
mlttee to-day gave hearing upon the Senate bill
introduced e. the suggestion of Acknowledgement
Jiriggs to provide for the removal 10 the proper
district for trial persons indicted for offences
against the United States. The bill prepared
10 cover the cases of Benjamin D. Greene John F..
William T. and Edmund H. GaynOr and Michael A
Connolly who indicted by the Grand Jury in
The Southern District OF Georgia for conspiracy TO
defraud the United States in the contracts for i'm
provements at Savannah and Cumberland Sound.
The indicted persons were arrested in New-York
but Judge Brown refused TO allow their extradtion
TO Georgia on technical grounds pertaining 10
cedure in New-York.
Colonel W ". Dudley was the first speaker He
said he represented certain railroad corporations,
and appeared call the attention or the committee
to some Of the dangers involved in the passage OF
the bill Such BILL applying TO civil as well as
to criminal cases. might, he commended. work great
hardship especially to railroad and other corpora
ton officials. If indicted outside the district in
which they lived they could be arrested and dis
graced although innocent and he urged that If the
legislation was to be enacted 1t should be
fully safeguarded. Colonel Dudley cited the case
of an offence against the Interstate Commerce
law Under the proposed bill II a railroad official
were indicted II would become the duty Of the
Court TO send a marshal 10 arrest him. when IT
a we'll known fact that all railroad corporations
wara AT all times anxious 10 charges Of viola
tons of law court.
Chairman Ray said the real question involved
was whether il good policy to remove a person
indicted from one Jurisdiction another the
simple presentment Of an indictment. Colonel Dud-
ley expressed the opinion that it would be against
public policy and did not think the business in
terests of the country should be subjected 10 the
dangers that lurked in this bill
Abram J. Rose followed Colonel Dudley While
he was the attorney of the Gaynors and Greene
he said ne did not especially their at
tornev but to call attention some things of
which he had peculiar knowledge He declared
that the District Attorney had eight witnesses and
many documents in the Gaynor case before the
United States Commissioner in New-York- II evil
deuce had been presented then showing the prob
able cause all this difficulty would have been
Obviated. and the demand for the enactment or
such far reaching general law done away with
The testimony in the Carter case was puohc prop
erty. and he asserted. therefore that there was
no reason Why II should not nsye been ro
tenton of the Attorney General that the presenta-
ton of evidence would disclose the Governments
case. he said. would not hold Mr.. Rose diateo on
the hardships which might result to defendants II
they must be removed when valid and legal rea-
might be set up to show the fAultiness or IN
dctments.
Chairman Ray said that he had received a let
ter from the Attorney-General suggesting amend
Inents bill to allow indicted persons TO show
as a reason for non-removal that they had not
found Mr. Rose asked why an allbl should De
allowed 10 be proved in the interest Of railroad
officias He said il would be dangerous TO make
mentioned railroad officials. but Mr. Rose read
newspaper statement SAYING ina, u was intehaSo
Rose declared with great emphasis reIerrns 20 the
convicted upon the indictment. for two reasons
First, there no conspiracy; second, the United
States never was defrauded
jourued until next Tuesday. when Colonel Dudley
and Mr.. Rose Will submit formal briefs