New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-04-08
THE COURTS.

INGs BEFORE THE COMMIsSIONER-rHE POWER
OF A UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT IN SUCH
MATTERS
The case Of Joseph Supp, alias Carl Vogt,
which, various questions of and OF fact has been
before the courts during he last three years. came up
again yesterday Ia the United States Circuit Court
Judge Batchord presiding Supp Is charged with the
murder, In Brussels Belgium Of the Chevalier Du Bos
de Bisnco. and with escaping TO this country with
large amount Of the Chevaier's property. sCommis-
sioner Kenneth g. White recently held stupp to await
the Presidents warrant Of exradton to Belgium 10 10
tried for the crime mentioned. His counsel Townsehd
Auh then applied to Judge Blatchford for writ OF
haoeas and ceriorar for the purpose Of having
the Commissioners proceedings IN the case reviewed
and set aside II found be The writ was
granted aud argument it heard yesterday, when
Mr. Coudert OF the firm OF Coudert Brothers counsel Tor
the Belgian Government contended that. in extrldi-
ton cases the proceeding before Commissioner cannot
be reviewed by United Circuit Court Judge aud
for the following reasons:
The Commissioner in eases OF extradilion. does not
act ~ al interior tribunal tue Circuit Court or
the United states in proper legal De said o be
a superior tribunal His power is derived from the law
O. 9th Stat 3a Brightley's Dig 1st, 2G9. which
provides that the "usrces OF the Supreme Court the
Judges II the several District Courts the Judges OF the
several State Courts aud the Commissioners authorized
To do oy OF the Courts vi United states are
severauy vested with power. Jurisdiction aud author
ty " to take cognlzance These various
magistrates therefore, placed precisely the same
footing and so far the question Of Jurisdiction Is CON
cerDed the Commissioners and the Justices OF the Su-
Court OF the United States coeaual in power
and authority. These procedures might nave
begun before The ChIefJustice OF the SUI
preme Court Of the United states and his decision
wonld nave had precisely the same weight
that OF the Commissioner, neither more nor less
The commissioners authority conferred by this stat
ute. does follow from the fact that he is a
commissioner OF the United States. He requires a
special delegation from a Federal court; IL Is not.
therefore, as commissioner or the United States
that he sis. but commissioner authorized 80 10 40
by OF the courts OF the United States. And 50 I'm.
portant has this distinction considered by one OF
the Justices ~ this Circuit, that the mere fact hat
commissioner. issuing warrant not therein de-
scriDed as commissioner appointed by the Cireuis
Court OF the United states for That purpose was heu
be fatal JursdctiOnal objection The matter Oh
Van Orlen, In 81 BltchOrd, directly IN point IL
under the act OF sept Is, 1850 u stdtuttsI a.
Large, 4G2. commonly called "T1e Fugitive slave act
which act. IN far 1t cOnfers power and jurisdiction
upon the commissioner Identical with the act OF loto
comforting jurisdiction IN extradltion IL was
claimed Van Ordea's case, the jurisdiction OF
the Federal Court extended to the lssance OF VII Oh
ceruOrarl under winch tae commissioners proceedings
might bc examined. and nis errors if any, rectined
Judge Belts, before whom the matter came, Used IAe
following language:
There are two fundamental errors in this PROPOSE
ton Commissioner IN tue execution or the duties
OF Office unGer the act OF September Is, $50 3Jl u
5. stat at Large iG4 Is IN no legal sense magistrate
Inferior the Circuit Court. No provision is made III
that act other subjecting h5 prnceedlhgs 10
the review ot tins Court, nor are his upctOhs
declared 10 he subordinate 10 the authority O any Otner
tribunal. The Court, making tle appointment OF
Commissioners. fu.hs agency imposed on II Dy Con-
gress ana no more acquires thefeDy superslsoiy au
thortY over BIN ais proceedings IN MS Orice tlaI
the President the has over Judges appointed
by them. He Is not even an Queer OF tnt court NJ
authority is given TO Courts OF the United states Ia
express terms. 10 issue Writ OF eertorar Inc Jnnge
closes his opinion win declaration nIe ..is
has jurisdiction In the matter presented oy ths app
cation, on winch can ORDER VIII Vi cerordi !" 10
Issued" -
There is one further objection Of very serious char
acter which does not appear from any o. the reported
to have been heretofore raised Inc act oi 1850
from which the Judges and Commissioners receive ter
power act In OF eX rad uon, naKes Tin ulpera
tive the duty of the 'ominia'0Her 10 certy tnc
taken by llm 10 tIlc SccFliID VI
t,0ncr asks that this eeitfcaie may DC inidr nor
rs cted by out 10 tribunal not des@aSu nor
even mentioned by Implication having any authority
IN the premises. II the Circuit Court approves Oh tne
decision OF the COmmlssloner, the eVlichce must s,
certified OF state ana the proceeding
before that Court is unnecessary H. on tue contrary
the Circuit Court should hold Oh the eVuchce liza. tnc
Comnussoner is wrong either 1t must compel hun TO
GisObey the clear lcCtrr OF the lay" ana upl'e .Ie La
ecutlve reYlsOry power Ol ItS lurlHulio ~ ~
yoked the possibility o. Ns peIu9 eIircIul ~
manifest from the language ol 'ho ac. ,n' h . 80, "a
ecutiye may look into the case ana eAI lihe hr
mOny before making the surrender; ana IL Is sugl'ted
1t would hardly be consistent Win tae oighaty
either Of the judiciary or OF the Executive tnt u
should u deprive the other or It's authority Of ILe
there should be conflict OF decision between tue t"o
In opposing the position taken By MI COuder' Eft
Aub of the FIRM of Townsend Aub, counsel for Supp
relied mainly upon the Of In re Robert NJ Mar
tin =" Parker's Grim Rep Io7. Tue decision In that
case IL that the court. habeas corpus not con
cuded by the finding OF the committing aalstrate ous
may 20 behind his order Of commitment anu oy Ger
torari look into the evidence taken before him. That
case MS will be seen by referring TO Parkers
Criminal Reports, and also TO Blatchi0rdS Cr-
emit Court Reports vol 5, page $685. did not
arise under PROCEEDINGS in extradItioO In replying 20
MIR Aub Mr.. Coudert claimed therefore, that YOGI
case was not covered by the authority clted ana 10
show that 10 ne read from the case OF In re
Robert n Martin" the following Language used by
Judge sblpman ia deciding II: " 10 aVOid all hiScOh-
cepttou IL NAV be well remark thAt the principles
here laid have necessary relation 10 the pow
ers conferred upon Commissioners unde: inc LAWS
touching the execution II eXtradtOD trtaf!rs
Judge BlatchfOri reserved his decision, ana as the
question presented considered Of great IMPORTANCE
and said TO be raised for the hsst time inc JddSes
views upon it are awaited with mucn interest
STORY OF THE GREAT BOND tOKuEh1'
HOW THE COUNTERFEIT BONDs WE'RE MANUFAC-
TURED-TEsTDOSY OF SPENCE PETTrs IN THE
SLIT AGAINST CHARLES ROIsTOS AND OTHERS.