| Show EAL ean BEYOND LAW naw AND discretion THE tue prosecution in the rudger clawson case t failing to bring any direct evidence whatever against the accused endeavored to prejudice the minds of the jury because certain witnesses were iyre nov not produced it was wah assumed that they were concealed spirited away or to use mr air carians Va rians stale plagiarism 11 gone 0 where the woodbine gwineth tw ineth sent by the underground rall rali railway Way 11 passing M by the absurd position that the production non nod of witnesses bythe by the prosecution should reflect unfavorably upon the defendant we here wish to venture the suggestion that it is quite possible the prosecution were werd anxious about procuring those witnesses as they wished to appear and we are supported in this opinion by the fact that some witnesses alleged to have blendon come at able abie were seen on the streets of this city at the time of their alleged mysterious disappearance pe arance at A great fuss was made in regard to 0 one ne witness who was subpoenaed and who after the marshal marshai and ana his deputies had exceeded their duty in a pretended search for him one impudently invading his nis domicile quietly walked ento into court dourt and I 1 was wah there served with its process coz CON ever every eveny day when it was pretended he could not be found he was on the streets here and at his regular place of busI busl business hiess fiess these are facts that can be proved beyond dispute and if this was therease the case in this instance it may havo have I 1 been in others othero W we 61 y wish here also aiso to inform worm those of our readers who may not understand the law that no DO officer be he united states marshal Ai arshal or county sheriff or city policeman has any ally right to force ills lils wa into a Ter persons dersons sons hous eto hunt hant for a witness there is a right aright way to serve a subpoena and every other vay any Is wrong if an officer knows kno avs that a witness in a civil case has concealed himself in a building or vessel goas so as to td prevent service upon lupon him the officer may make an affidavit of the concealment and of the materiality of the evidence of such witness and on obtaining yn lun order of court the united states 81 Mar far shalor shalon sheriff of the county may break into the build inor lnor or vessel where the witness is concealed concealed but in the ordinary service of a subpoenas such violence olence Ni is unlawful and the provision pro pra that authorizes the lorce force lorce per permissible under an order of court I 1 is part of the civil code only there is nothing in the criminal procedure of this territory that permits forcible entrance into any premises for the service cf a sub Aub poma an officer who thus exceeds his duty stands in the same position asla asa private individual if he attempts to force his way into a house he may be trea treated tedas as a burglar or any other othen enters inters loper we t V e do dd not wish to throw a in the way of any officer in the lawful discharge of his duty buti but we wish our people to understand their rights that they may not suffer themselves 7 to ue waleen over oy by men desire to gain a little cheap notoriety and to manifest their zeal in the gheant anti mor imor mon cause which Is really far more lawless than that which it aims alms kosup press |
