Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1877-05-17
KETCH VS.. KETCH.

The hangmen of Humboldt County not
only assert their own constitutional preroga-
tives, but declare in substance that the gal
lowsmen of Elko County have no rights winch
they are bound to respect. One CfoMer, poor
devil is the bone of contention In the
emergencies of his career as plstol-packer ne
was called upon, in an untlmely moment, 10
slay one Montana Charley. Now, as natu-
raj incident in his spotted career, Crozier Is
under sentence of death. He slew his man IN
Elko, but the Humboldters had the proud
privilege of trying him and finding him guilty
of murder Now come the Elkonlan glbbet-
GERS and demand the hanging of their late fell
low citizen, as an inalienable right. The
voice of Humboldt is heard sneering at the
demand The Silver State of Tuesday in
forms us as follows:
We are reliably informed that the authori
ties of ElkO County, claim and assert the
right to execute R. H. Crozier, who was sent
here for trial on change of venue, and con-
victed of murder in the first degree, i'll the
Court of the Fourth Judicial District. They
say that CrOzler ought to be sent to ElkO to
be executed that his punishment might be
warning to those who knew that he commit
ted the crime of which he has been convicted.
District Attorney Harding is of the opinion
that the officers of ElkO County, which is
outside this Judicial Disarict, cannot legally
execute the Judgment of the Court here III
capital cases, and that they cannot insist upon
it as a right. anymore than they could insist
upon conveying CrOzier to the State Prison,
had he been sentenced to that institution.
The plaintiff III the case is the State of Ne
vada, and Elko is no more part OF the State
than Humboldt 1t is no more the right OF
the Sheriff of Elko County to execute Crozler,
than il was for the District Attorney of Elko
to prosecute him after the case had been
transferred from that county. 1t Is the duty
of the Sheriff of Humboldt to execute the
Judgment of the Court here. We believe the
question has never before been raised III the
State, and if the Sheriff of Elko insists on
what he considers his right and duty, it may
have to be determined by the Courts, as the
wishes of the unfortunate being, who is the
principal i'll the case, are not likely to be con-
suited at all i'll the matter.
This is not to be noted as the most cheerful
of subjects; and the controversy might well
have been left to the privacy of some moot
Court convened for the purpose of hearing it.
But pray tell the MORNING APPEAL, some
body what becomes of the ''eXemplaly plea
for hanging up a man at the end of a rope if
Mr.. Crozier is not to be hanged i'll Elko Let
him be suspended from gallows there and
we warrant that other man Of his name,
or, at any rate, not he himself, will ever kill
Montana Charley any more. That Is the ar
gument, if you please; and there Is point to
it, 1t is knock-down argument, or the next
best thing to it. Hang Crozier in Humboldt,
and what good will come of it He might as
well be hanged in Oregon or Honolulu, so far
as the example goes But if the whimsey of
example" is abated and the principle be
honestly and ingenuously asserted that
man slayers must be hanged because, when
man is convicted of murder in the first degree,
the law as well as the cuprit is at the end of Its
rope and has nothing to do but to terminate
the issue by destroying one of Its factors, (as
Hayes conveniently does when he gets into
dilemma, like the army payments, for exam
ple), then Humboldt County is quite as good
place for putting the man to death as any
other. The MORNING APPEAL which is en-
tirely disinterested in the matter suggests
that possibly it would be decent to wait until
the Supreme Court decides the matter finally:
and that then, if Crozier must die, let him be
consulted 1t is barely possible that he
would rather be hanged in Elko for examples
sake than in Humboldt to satisfy technical
ity of the Criminal Practice Act.