People ex rel. Rothensies v. Searles

Hasbrouck, J. (dissenting).

The principle upon which the affirmance rests is that there is no power in a judge of the Supreme Court to review another judge’s fixing of bail in a criminal case. If that be so, then the, writ of habeas corpus constitutes no remedy. It has been held in other States and by the Federal courts that such writ in such cases is proper. (Evans v. Foster, 1 N. H. 374; Jones v. Kelly, 17 Mass. 116; Whiting v. Putnam, 17 id. 175; Ex parte Duncan, 53 Cal. 410; 54 id. 75; United States v. Brawner, 7 Fed. 87; Matter of Kaine, 3 Blatchf. 1, 4; Matter of Martin, 5 id. 303;…