saving an innocent man.

An example of this was the case of William H. Ellis, recently
brought into the public eye through his connection with the
treaty between the United States Government and King Menelik
of Abyssinia. Ellis was accused in 1901 by a young woman of
apparently excellent antecedents and character of a serious
crime. Prior to his indictment a colored man employed in his
office (the alleged scene of the crime) disappeared. When the
case was moved for trial, Ellis, through his attorneys, moved
for a commission to take the testimony of this absent, but
clearly material, witness in one of the remote States of
Mexico--a proceeding which would require a journey of some two
weeks on muleback, beyond the railway terminus. The district
attorney, in view of the peculiarly opportune disappearance of
this person from the jurisdiction, strenuously opposed the
application and hinted at collusion between Ellis and the
witness. The application, however, was granted, and a delay
of over a month ensued. During that time evidence was
procured by the counsel of the prisoner showing conclusively
that the complaining witness was mentally unsound and had made
similar and groundless charges against others. The indictment
was at once dismissed.

But such delays are not always so righteously employed. There
is a story told of a case where a notorious character was
charged with the unusual crime of "mayhem"--biting off another
man's finger. The defendant's counsel secured adjournment
after adjournment--no one knew why. At last the case was
moved for trial and the prosecution put in its evidence,