The Washington times., 1927-03-08


States Army. honorably retired in
1918, was, in 1924, taken into St.
EIizabeth's without legal process Of
/ any kind, and there detained.
Immediately Seized
On August .. 1926, Mr.. Grove was
ordered discharged from st. Eliza.
beth's by the court on writ Of
habeas corpus on the ground that
his detention was unlawful. Imme.
diately upon his release he was
seized within the court house by a
i policeman and taken to Gallinger
Hospital, from which he was later
taken back to st. Elizabeth's.
Another writ Of habcas corpus
was obtained for his release on the
| ground that the arrest was Illegal
| in that the superintendent OF police
had failed to notify Groves rela.
tives or friends of his arrest as ex-
pressly required by law, that he was
| privileged from arrest or other
process while In attendance at court.
and that he was also privileged
from arrest in jurisdiction wherein
he had been held by force and un.
der duress.
The court continued the case to
September 10, when Grove was
brought in for final disposition of
the matter.
The court asked the United States
attorney IL he had anything further
in the way Of argument to offer,
and, being answered in the mega
tive, the court ordered Grove dis
charged under the writ Of habeas
corpus, to which Judgment the
United States attorney excepted, and
gave notice Of appeal.
Verdict Final
Thus tho judgment Of the court
became final and by Groves dis
charge was executed, and he and
his counsel and friends left the
court room. For some unknown
reason the order was not recorded.
All of the proceedings brought in
Groves behalf had been terminated
in his favor.
His Initial commitment to st. Eliza
beth's was adjudged illegal; the sub
sequent arrest and second commit
ment were likewise adjudged to be
unlawful. He was a free man by
order of the court. yet the officials
or st. Elizabeth's refused to relia.
quish possession Of his personal prop
erty, including his clothing and some
two hundred dollars, until forced to
do so.
Further, after Grove, being dis.
charged by the court and being 4
free man, had left the District Of
Columbia, warrants were caused to
be sworn out for his arrest. Also,
while the habeas corpus action was
rending undetermined, the District
Commissioners, at the request OF the
hospital, instituted a lunacy case
against him, thereby disregarding
the Supreme Courts position in the
question.
For this lunacy trial, entry was
made only three days In advance
and Grove was notified only the
day before that he was to be
brought to trial the next morning,
which made 1t practically impos-
sible for him to secure defense or
witnesses.
This action, however, was an
corpus action, which cleared Grove.
Statement Issued
Although the court had discharged
Grove at the second habeas corpus
hearing. the hospital authorities
issued a statement about him, in
which the following paragraph APP
peared:
''The Judge announced that he
was going to discharge patient,
whereupon patient left the city.
The judge subsequently changed
MS mind and refused to sign the
order discharging patient"
The McCarl report contained the
same statement-word for word the
same-and that statement is not
borne out by the facts. The court