The Jeffersonian Democrat. [volume] (Chardon, Ohio) 1854-1865, 1860-03-16
Gov. Dennison Refuses to Surrender
Them.


Tho National Democrat of this morning
publishes, with a column Of ebuso of tho
Governor, tho following letter. to wit:
STATE OF ONO EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,
COLUMBUS March s, 1860.
NJ JOHNSON. Esq Cleveland
have examined tho acquisitions of tho
Governor of Virginia. and their accom-
panying documents. for the extradition of
Owen Brown and Francis Merriam, which
YOU delivered to mo on the 9th instant, and
have decided not tn issue ei iher of the war
rants asked for. The reasons for this con-
cIusion ! have communicated to tho Gov
ernor Of Virginia.
Respectfully yours, W DENNIsoN.
IL was shrewd in the Democrat To abuse
tho Governor before hs reasons for do
clining tho demand made by the Virginia
Executive are made public for when those
reasons are published every man of good,
unbiased common sense will, no doubt, he
satisfied that Gov Dunnison perfectly un-
dcrstands tho constitution and the law OF
comfy that governs such cases.-CIeUe'
idnd Herald.
Since the above was put in type, We have
received tho Herald OF Tuesday ovoning
from which we tako the following:
Gov. Dennison, on request of the editors
of tho State Journdt, has furnished that pa
per his correspondence with Gov. Lotcher,ot
Va, upon tho subject of the requisition OF
the latter to deliver up to Virginia, Brown
and Merriam. Gov. Donnison's letter is as
follows;
STATE OF ONO, ExECUTIvE DEPARTMENT. !
Columbus. March 9Th, 1860
His Erceiiency John Leicher, Gopernor Of
Virginid:
SRI havo carefully examined tho requl.
sition of your ExcoIloncy, and ther accom-
panyiug documents for tho extradition of
Owen Brown and Francis Merriam, charged
US being rugitives from the justice of Vir-
gina, aud as now being within this State;-
and am satisfied that no sufficient case is
presented to authorize me to issue either of
tho warrants asked tor. The reasons for
this conclusion are fully set forth in tho copy
of the opinion of the Attorney General OF
this State, to whom submitted the papers
in the case. which have the honor to trans
init herewith With sentiments of high re-
Spcct, Your obodient servant,
w. DENNIS0N.
This lcttcr is based on an elaborate opin-
ion of Attorney. General Wolco:t. in which
that gentleman ably reviews the whole ques.
ton. After quoting the Constitutional OBJ
legation and tho act of Congress for surrcn-
der OF fngitives, tho Attorney General says:
BY their very terms, no person can DO re-
moved from ono State to another. III virtue
of those Cons titutional and statutory pro.
visions, except on the Simultaneous occur
renee of threo distinct conditions.
l. Ho must havo been charged in another
State, by indictment or affidavit, with the
commission there of"rousou, felony or 9th
cr crime"
2. Ho must have flod that State to escape
its justice, and
| 3. Demand for his urrcndor-accompa
nicd by an authentic copy of tho indictment
or affidavit on which the demand is prGdi
catcd--must have been made of tho execn'
two authority of the Stare 10 which he fled
by tho executive authority of the State rom
which tho fright was made.
When these do cOncurrently happen, the
power to deliver results. aud must be exc
cu.od. Each, however, is in the nature OF d
precedent condition; SO that tho absence O.:
any ono of them is not less fatal than the
! absonce Of all
These, aud not less than these, arc tho
limitations with which tho right Of extradi.
tion has beer carefully hedged about by the
Constitution and tho act OF Congress. In
the very spirit indicated by these Jealous
safeguards tho right ought always TO be cx-
ertod. For this power, which relcgates the
citizen to another jurisdiction, and deprives
him of that protection which. as general
rule, the State owes 10 every sojourner with
in its liuits-is of SO high nature rs to OK
act tho utmost care in its application, even
to tho prescribed cases. Every one charged
with IT'S execution should SEQ TO il that all
tho securities by which it has been SO anx,
iously surrounded nro observed with rigor-
Gus fidelity.
Tho Attorney. General then sprcRds out
all tho evidence submitted by tho Execu'
two OF Vrgnra, and shows there is not Il
particle of evidence showing that these men
ever flud from Virginia, save tho allegation
in the indictment-"that ;he otlen'e was
therG committed"
Tho Attorney General concludes thus:
These considerations, it seems to NE. are
entirely decisive. For tho reason that the
rpQuisitinn, with its annexed documents,
furnishes no evidence of tho fight OF MOI,
riam from Virginia. it altogether fails, in m!
Judgment to make out u case which will
I warrant tho extraditon. Whether this do
feet can DO cured is q question which nd
dresses itself solely to the authorities of iha
State. Finding ono barrier to tho exercis,
of tho authority invoked by this requisi,on
it has not seemed proper to inquire US to The
existence of any other. For all presen
purposes, it is enough To know that as thu
cass new stands, the objection is fatal.