The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1907-01-13
ARRAICNS METHODS
OF CORONER HEWITT
CONTINUED PROM FIRST PAGE.

I tON1INb I'D fkOM FIRST BANh.
likely to be produced, and I asked their
release accordingly.
The coroner told me that he intended
to hold them all, whereupon 1 replied
that his attitude would drive me TO the
necessity Of releasing the men by habeas
corpus. l was not very politely told by
| the coroner that ] might do as l pleased,
/ whereupon, on the following day, I pro-
cured the release Of all the men. When
/ the taking of testimony by the jury was
closed l advised the engineer and con-
/ ductor Of the coIliding train that they
/ were at liberty TO go to their homes,
subject TO the verdict of the jury espe-
| cially as they were then each under
heavy bail TO report TO the Supreme
Court Of the District Of Columbia under
/ the writs Of habeas corpus.
! Nevertheless, they were detained by
| the police officers throughout the six
/ hours the jury was celebrating, on the
authority. as the officers told me, Of the
/ coroner. who had directed that all wit
Inesses be held until the verdict
When I reminded the officers that the
subpoena before the jury, and. therefore,
not within the scope Of the coroner's or
| der, unlawful as il was, they told me
/ that they would hold the men anyhow,
and did 50, thus subjecting them 10
second unlawful Imprisonment.
Not Allowed to Eat.
/ Moreover during the inquest. the
coroner similarly imprisoned three wit
Inesses whom the railroad company had
| voluntarily produced from out Of town,
and these witnesses were unable even 10
go 10 luncheon except under the parole OF
a representative OF the district attorneys
office. who undertook To be responsible
for them. Finally. when the jury's YER
diet was rendered. and before I had time
/ 10 get TO the place Of inquest. the engi-
/ Heer and conductor were hurried 10 Jail
| in wagon. and / was put to the neces-
/ sity Of spending hours in getting together
the proper officers and bondsmen to Sc
cure their release.
| a condition OF law which makes such
/ performances possible is simply out
rageous. and it is proposed by section
Z Of the bin TO forbid any such action by
| the coroner in the future, and to give 70
I q
corOncr's inquest the right TO preliminary
! accusation, with the usual privilege Of
admission 10 bail, 10 await the result OF
the inquest
II der existing law. the coroner claims
the absolute right 10 conduct an inquest
both as respects the witnesses TO be pro-
duCed and their examination. and denies
that any one but himself has any right
either TO produce or to interrogate a wit
ness.
Coroner Has Assistance.
In the recent inquest. the coroner was
most efficiently aided in framing and put
ting his questions by the two civilian Com
missiOners, who devoted TO the work more
than an entire week taken from their
regular duties. and. while the representa-
tives of the district attorneys office were
freely permitted to question the Wit
nesses. / was at first denied the right
and afterward accorded IL only as an act
Of condescension on The part OF the coro-
ner. The anomaly Of this IS apparent
/ The persons who would be required 10
prosecute any person held by the jury
We're given free rein 20 iuterrogate the
witnesses. while J. who was expected 10
defend some Of them. including the man
at whom the testimony was directed
was denied any right in the premises.
At the recent inquest the scope Of the
inquiry. which should have been limited
( TO ascertainiug the cause of death of the
person whose death vas being inquired
/ into. was given a wide range and made
20 cover matters wholly without the
scope of the coroner's inquiry, such as
the conduct of the railroad company and
its officials after the accident which
could by no possibility. shed any light
upon the question of the liability Of those
thought 10 be responsible Moreover,
hoarsay testimony Of all kinds. and opin-
ion evidence. given upon matters not the
subject of such evidence. and by persons
not shown 20 be qualified 10 give il. was
freely admitted and the matter was so
handled that witness after witness was
repeatedly recalled and matters previous
~ covered repeatedly gone over again. so
as 70 make the record a veritabIe patch
Work.
Would save Time.
If the law were that the district at
torney should present the case To the
jury. he would do So IN orderly fashion
and much time would thereby be saved.
and persons interested in the inquest
would be spared the expense Of an IN
duly protracted hearing. and. should the
cxigency arise. as recent experience
demonstrated that It may arise. il is
eminently proper that a justice Of the
Supreme Court should preside over an in
quest just as, under existing law, be
presides over induisitiOns in lunaCy.'