I hereby certify that the above transcript is a true and correct copy of the above proceedings as appears by my docket. [SEAL] LEROY E. BAILEY, Justice of the Peace in and for the Third Township, County of Madera. Dated at Madera, California, this 24th day of November, 1939. EXHIBIT 13098 3851. IN THE JUSTICE'S COURT, THIRD TOWNSHIP, COUNTY OF MADERA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA LEROY E. BAILEY, JUSTICE OF THE PEACE The People of the State of California, Plaintiff, vs. Ted Sisemore, Defendant Complaint of W. O. Justice charging disturbing the peace. Committed at Third Township, County of Madera, State of California, on the 12th day of October, 1939. Oct. 16, 1939. Oct. 16, 1939. Complaint filed and warrant issued. Defendant appeared personally, heard the reading of the complaint, was informed of his constitutional rights, entered a plea of not guilty, and bail was set at $500.00. Defendant was represented by counsel. Bail bond filed and release issued. I hereby certify that the above transcript is a true and correct copy of the above proceedings as appears by my docket. [SEAL] LEROY E. BAILEY, Justice of the Peace in and for the Third Township, County of Madera. Dated at Madera, California, this 24th day of November, 1939. EXHIBIT 13099 3861. IN THE JUSTICE'S COURT, THIRD TOWNSHIP, COUNTY OF MADERA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA-LEROY E. BAILEY, JUSTICE OF THE PEACE The People of the State of California, Plaintiff, vs. Ray Williams, Defendant Complaint of E. E. Pickett charging C. O. 168. Committed at Third Township, County of Maderia, State of California, on the 14th day of October, 1939. Date Oct. 16th, 1939 _ _ Complaint filed and warrant issued. Proceedings Defendant appeared personally, heard the reading of the complaint, was informed of his constitutional rights, entered a plea of not guilty, and defendant was released on his own recognizance on motion of the District Attorney. I hereby certify that the above transcript is a true and correct copy of the above proceedings as appears by my docket. [SEAL] LEROY E. BAILEY, Justice of the Peace in and for the Third Township, County of Madera. Dated at Madera, California this 24th day of November, 1939. 3. MADERA COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE A. AFFIDAVIT OF SHERIFF W. O. JUSTICE ANSWERING SUBPENA EXHIBIT 13100 AFFIDAVIT OF W. O. JUSTICE BY WAY OF RETURN TO SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM STATE OF CALIFORNIA, County of Madera, 88: W. O. JUSTICE, being first duly sworn, deposes and makes this affidavit by way of return to that certain Subpoena Duces Tecum, which said subpoena was heretofore served upon your affiant requiring him to appear before the Sub-Committee of the Committee on Education and Labor of the United States Senate at San Francisco, California. That affiant is the duly elected, qualified and acting Sheriff of and for the County of Madera, in the State of California, and first regularly took office as such Sheriff on the 7th day of January, 1935. Your affiant has heretofore appeared before said Sub-Committee and then and there given certain testimony. That affiant desires to state herein more definitely his response to said subpoena. Replying to paragraph 1 of said subpoena, and particularly to subdivision (a) thereof, your affiant furnishes herewith a record indicating the names of all persons commissioned or authorized to act as deputy or special deputy sheriff in the County of Madera from January 1, 1933 to November 8, 1939, which list also answers subdivision (b) of said paragraph and indicates the dates of appointments and terminations of office of all such persons. In further reply to said subdivisions (a) and (b) of said paragraph, your affiant states that he has no record, correspondence, receipt or other document showing anything in connection with the appointment or authorization of deputy constables or other peace officers, such as the police of incorporated cities within the County of Madera. Replying to subdivisions (a) and (b) of said paragraph with reference to gun permits, your affiant produces herewith his official record of applications for permits in connection with the carrying of arms. No applications are permitted to be filed except when it is previously determined to grant permits; and no permits to carry arms have been given except to persons who have made such written applications; permits have been given to all such persons; so that the record of the applications accurately reflects the permits which have been granted. That your affiant has no record or information in connection with permits to persons to carry arms which may have been issued by the chiefs of police of incorporated cities within the County of Madera. Replying to subdivision (c) of said paragraph 1, your affiant desires to explain that such records are filed with the County Auditor of the County of Madera, and that the same may be obtained by your Sub-Committee upon application to the County Auditor, or may be inspected at his office by any investigator, all of such payments and expenses being matters of public record. Your affiant, in connection with said matter, has nothing other than a memorandum showing the items and the total amount paid to special deputies, which memorandum has been exhibited to Jack B. Burke, and if still desired will produce it. Answering subdivision (d) of said paragraph, your affiant has received no consideration from any source whatever for the services performed by special deputies or other peace officers in the County of Madera, saving and excepting that about one (1) year prior to the date of said subpoena, according to the best recollection of your affiant, he deputized two (2) persons to act as special deputies sheriff at and during the Madera County Fair; that the services rendered by such deputies were paid for to affiant as sheriff from funds furnished by the Madera County Fair Association; that the services so rendered constituted employment as peace officers in policing said fair, and as custodians of property there located during the fair; that said services had no connection in any way with any labor controversy; that your affiant has no documents or records which indicate the payment made to affiant, or to any municipal, county, state or local official other than as above indicated to your affiant in connection with the matters set forth in said subdivision (d); and in so far as your affiant has any personal knowledge in the premises, he knows of no such payment in the County of Madera. Replying to subdivision (e) of said paragraph, your affiant states that every deputy, regular or special, gives a bond for the faithful performance of his duties, which said bonds during the period of time covered by this subpoena (limited to the period that your affiant has been in office) have been filed in the office of the County Clerk, and that your affiant has no duplicates, copies or other record of said bonds, but that copies thereof may be obtained, or the originals thereof inspected, at the office of the County Clerk of the County of Madera, as public records open to inspection. That in connection with the equipping and arming of deputies sheriff, either regular or special, or other peace officers, your affiant has at no time during his term of office had anything to do with such matter, but each and all deputies furnish their own side arms; that your affiant has no knowledge concerning the arming or equipping of other peace officers in the County of Madera, as hereinbefore explained, because he has neither control nor jurisdiction over any peace officers except deputies sheriff. Replying to paragraph 2, your affiant states that he does not have in his possession any books, records, correspondence, receipts, vouchers, bills of lading, way bills, or other documents or memoranda described therein relating to the purchase, rental or borrowing by Madera County, California, or by any deputy sheriff or other officer, of any of the items described in said paragraph; and by way of explanation for the assistance of your Sub-committee, your affiant states that in his county all purchases of such items, whether made by telephonic or written order, will be disclosed by the records of payments made therefor, which are filed with the County Auditor of the County of Madera, and may be examined by your committee or any person as public records; that your affiant has no records in his possession which indicate the purchase, rental or borrowing of any of the items described in said paragraph 2 by any peace officer or person other than as hereinbefore set forth. Replying further to said paragraph 2, your affiant states that he has no record or other document indicating each or any item described in said paragraph which may have been in his possession or under his control within the time mentioned in said subpoena and during his term of office, showing the manufacturer, seller, purchaser, serial number, date of purchase or date of receipt, of any such weapons; and that in your affiant's opinion the only manner in which such information could be obtained would be from inspection of weapons in your affiant's custody, or from the annual inventory returned by affiant to the County Clerk. Answering paragraph 3, your affiant states that he does not have in his possession and has at no time had in his possession any correspondence, contracts, agreements, memoranda or transcripts of conversations between him or his deputies or employees and any of the persons, corporations or associations described in said paragraph, or in connection with any of the matters described in Subdivisions a, b, c, and d thereof, except certain form-letters and bulletins from the Associated Farmers of California, Inc., which are produced herewith, and except also one letter received from an existing labor union. That with respect to the things mentioned in said letter your affiant states that said things came into his possession confidentially in his official capacity in connection with the investigation of persons against whom criminal proceedings have been taken and are now pending in said County of Madera, in the Superior Court thereof; the disclosure of these matters, in your affiant's opinion, and after a consultation with the district attorney of said county in respect to the investigation of the criminal activities and prosecution of said persons for public crimes, would be detrimental to the public interest; and that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure of such matters; that to the best of affiant's knowledge and belief, said matters will be used as evidence in said criminal proceedings; that the detriment to public interest among other things is manifest because the disclosure of such information prior to the trial of said case would, in the opinion of your affiant, prejudice the case of the People of the State of California. It is the duty of the affiant to procure and preserve evidence, and to the best of his ability to assist in the prosecution of all public offenses committed in the County of Madera. That in connection with the inability of your affiant to furnish these matters by reason of his said duty as the sheriff of the County of Madera, he presents herewith an opinion of the Attorney-General of the State of California, which he has attached hereto, designated as "Exhibit 1" and made a part of this affidavit. In connection with paragraph 3, your affiant desires to state for the Committee's benefit that copies of all teletype messages are kept for a period of about two years, but that so far as your affiant knows, no teletype message has been sent or received by your affiant or any of his deputies to any of the persons described in paragraph 3 in connection with any of the items in Subdivisions a, b, c, and d thereof. That your affiant herewith has shown to Jack B. Burke, your investigator, all of the teletype messages in his possession which have been received from December 1, 1938 to November 8, 1939, and if still desired will produce the rest; that all earlier teletype messages have been destroyed; Answering paragraph 4, your affiant states that he has no correspondence, memoranda, telegrams, pamphlets or other items described in said paragraph, which have been received by him and which relate to the matters set forth in Subdivisions a, except as hereinabove explained, and none set forth in subdi. vision b, c, and d, and none set forth in subdivision e thereof except as herein after explained. Further answering said paragraph 4, your affiant states that he has none of the items mentioned which may have been transmitted to any other officer or employee of the County of Madera, or to such county, and has no means of knowing anything about the transmission of any such matters other than communications to the office of the Sheriff. Specifically answering Subdivision (e), your affiant states that he has had in his possession copies of ordinances of the County of Madera pertaining to labor matters, being specifically Nos. 167 and 168, copies of which ordinances your affiant is informed and believes have been furnished to your Sub-Committee by the District Attorney of Madera County. Answering paragraph 5, your affiant states that he does not have, and at no time since the service of said subpoena has had in his possession any of the things set forth in said paragraph which relate to employment by him of any private detective agency or person for the performance of any of the services described in Sections a, b, c, d, and e of said paragraph; but for the further information of your Sub-committee, affiant states that any payments which may have been made to any person for any services of the character described pursuant to any oral arrangement with your affiant may be found in the records of warrants issued by the County Auditor of Madera County, and are a matter of public record which may be examined by any investigator of your Committee or any person. Answering paragraph 6, your affiant states that he does not have in his possession any of the matters therein described and that if he has at any time received any printed circular or pamphlet which might fit the description of said paragraphs he has not retained the same in his possession. And Deponent says that in his personal capacity, as distinguished from his official capacity, he does not have, and has not had any of the things directed by said subpoena to be produced. Further Deponent sayeth not. W. O. JUSTICE. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 18th day of December, 1939. [Attached to above affidavit] EXHIBIT 1 Honorable GEORGE W. MORDECAI, District Attorney of Madera County, SAN FRANCISCO, December 12, 1939. Madera, California DEAR SIR: I have before me your communication under date of December 5, 1939, which is as follows: "The Sheriff of Madera County and I have been served with the enclosed subpoenas duces tecum by the sub-committee of the Committee on Education and Labor of the United States Senate presently sitting in the City and County of San Francisco for the purpose of taking testimony under the authority of a resolution of the United States Senate. "These subpoenas call for a mass of documents bearing on law enforcement conditions in Madera County. Some of them are part and parcel of pending criminal cases and investigations in the detection of crime, all of which are of a highly confidential character. It is our desire to cooperate with the Committee and produce any and all documents the disclosure of which will not interfere with our obligations as law enforcement officers and I would therefore request your opinion as to our duty under these subpoenas to the Committee and to the people whom we serve." The subpoena duces tecum served upon you and Sheriff W. O. Justice of Madera County are similar in their general import and requirements, and will therefore here be considered together, for the principles and rules which will be hereinafter announced apply alike both to the district attorney and the sheriff of any county of the State of California. The documents and information called for in the subpoena fall generally into five classifications, as follows: 1. Public records or copies thereof which are in your possession, or copies of public records in your possession the originals of which are in the possession of other State, county, township or municipal officers; 2. Public records not in your possession; 3. Correspondence, documents, records and information (other than public records and documents), and correspondence with private individuals, corporations and associations; 4. Reports of and information concerning or received from informers; and 5. Reports of and information concerning or received from undercover employees, and inter-office and inter-departmental communications. You state your desire to cooperate with the Committee and to produce any and all documents the disclosure of which will not interfere with your obligations as law enforcement officers; and with most of the classifications above set forth little difficulty should be experienced in extending such cooperation. With regard to classifications 1 and 2, you should make available to the Committee all public records or copies of public records which you have in your possession, and with regard to such records not in your possession and of which you do not have copies, you should fully advise the Committee as to the office in which the same may be found, if such information is within your knowledge. With regard to the third classification, you should make full disclosure of the correspondence, documents, records, etc. therein referred to, where such disclosure would not violate the rule of privileged communications hereinafter referred to. It is only with regard to the fourth and fifth classifications above set forth that a substantial question arises. Under the English common law it was early recognized that in many instances a public officer was a trustee on behalf of the public of information acquired by him in his official capacity and in confidence, and that rule was well expressed by Mr. Justice Gray of the Supreme Judicial Court of the State of Massachusetts in the case of Worthington v. Scribner, 109 Mass. 487, 12 Am. Rep. 726, wherein he said: "It is the duty of every citizen to communicate to his government any information which he has of the commission of an offense against the laws. To encourage him in performing this duty without fear of consequences, the law holds such information to be among the secrets of states, and leaves the question how far and under what circumstances the names of the informers and the channel of communication shall be suffered to be known, to the absolute discretion of the government, to be exercised according to its views of what the interests of the public require. Courts of justice, therefore, will not compel or allow the discovery of such information, either by the subordinate officer to whom it is given, by the informer himself, or by any other person, without the permission of the government. The evidence is excluded, not for the protection of the witness or of the party in the particular case, but upon general |