New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1853-09-08
SUPREME cOURT-Beiore Judge EpNoSps.
ExrRAptrfoN cAsE-ckLpxR rtscaARagp


Judge f. rendered decision yesterday forenoon In the
of Wm Calder claimed by the British Government
der the Ahburton Treaty charge forgery already
erred He considers in the present that the cir
cumstances do not warrant the detention asked for u
Calder await further testimony from England-and that
il is doubtful whether in any such detention would be
warranted by the treaty the OF Congress- and
dered that the prisoner be discharged:
The following is the decision of Judge e. certified 10
the Department of State:
l. John w Edmonds, Justice Of the Supreme Court Of
the State of New York. do further report that in comp
with the suggestion contained in the communication
of the State Department TO under date OF LIST Sept
inst have taken into mature consideration the appca
ton the part of the British Government to suspend the
discharge of the prisoner until further evidence Of his
guilt may be brought from abroad and of opinion that
such application ought not to be granted.
In the frst place my decision on the question Of the
prisoners guilt founded all the evidence which the
British Government laid before me- was finally pronoun
cod before any such application made to me- and tho
application Is therefore not to postpone the the examine
tom for that was brought to close by my decision but 10
open again for the reception OF further testimony and
that without any allegation that 1t has been newly dis
covered since that adjudication Such il appears TO me- Il
the application and to grant it would be quite irregular and
without sound precedent.
In the next place that there is definite time within
which such examination must be brought To CLOSE mean
examination preliminary 10 commitment Tor trials yet
the practice in this State has been like tina, in England
requiring il to b. brought TO close within three days.
unless extraordinary circumstances should justify
longer delay.
Now there is not in this case any such extraordinary
circumstance II IL the ordinary of complainant
who fails for want of evidence to make out his charge
when if the charge is true the evidence that wanting
Just much at his command any other part so
that in fact the application to detan the prisoner In Gus
tody until tho supply the consequence OF his
own remssness This would by no means justify 50 long
detention is asked for in this ii would warrant
any.
In the third place entertained strong doubts whether
in any of extradton where the demanding Govern
mt has fled to make out it, II would be proper to
hold the accused in custody until further evidence from
home could be sent for and procured can find no war
rant for such proceeding either in the Treaty the act
of Congress; but, the other hand, implication at
least that the demand is to be made evidence sufficient
warrant the arrest and detention of the accused.
nder these circumstances have refused the apIiica
ton for delay, and discharge the accused from custody
under my warrant
Given under my hand and seal at the City Of New York.
this 9Th day of September, 1888.
lSgned) j. w EDMoSDs, Justice.
SUPREME COURT-In Chamber-Before Judge ROOSEVELT.