The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1878-09-12
gatellige,teer.
a REFUGE FOR THIEVES.
views OF Leading Journals of both Parties
From The Boston Transcript

Governor Rice refuses 10 surrender
Kimpton, giving only o. conclusion and
carefully withholding the grounds for it
-stating cnly that the indictment found,
in South Carolina "does not appear to be
for the purpose of trying Kimpton for
the crime charged against him, but for
different purpose" and therefore with
holding, in his discretion, Q warrant for
his rendition. I'm taking this extraordi-
nary course he gives no points, no sum-
mary of evidence, and does not even in
dicate what that different purpose" is.
Two provisions of the national constitu-
tion have been violated. One provides
that ga person charged in any State with
treason, felony or other crime, who shall
flee from Justice and be found in another
State, shall, on the demand of the execa-
tive authority of the State from which he
( fed, be delivered up, to be removed to
the State baying jurisdiction of the same"
Another provision declares "full faith and
credit shall be given in each State to the
public acts, records and judicial proceed
ings of every other State" Our Execu-
tive refuses to deliver up a person charged
in another State with crime, and denies
full faith and credit TO the judicial pro-
ceedings of such State. The case is ag-
grayated by the consideration that the
party claimed is not citizen of Massa-
chusetts, but lately an, agent of South
Carolina. Whatever suspicious or irreg-
.ular action independent nations pursue
toWards each other, the States of this
Union are bound to treat each other in
this regard with the most absolute faith
and confidence. Governor Rice's action
is directly in the teeth of the Judicial
decisions. The Supreme Court of the
United States, the final interpreter of the
constitution, has solemnly held that the
Governor duty is not discretionary but
merely ministerial, and thatlhe has no
right to look behind the papers presented
to him. .(Kentucky vs.. Dennison, "a
Howard, 66, 1867 The Supreme Court
. of New Jersey in the case of VOORHEES,,
charged in 1869 with swindling and
claimed by the Governor of New Hamp-
shire, held the same way. Is Vroom's
Reports, 141.) We have Governor who
sets himself above the constitution and
law as construed by the tribunals appoin-
ted to construe and declare them. Mas
sachusetts, for this violation of two pro-
visions Of the constitution and of good
faith between States, will have to pay
dearly. She will be paid in her own
coin. The State of South Carolina will,
IN its discretion, be tempted to refuse
credit to the documents of State which
denies credit to hers, and the Ponds,
Winsloas and Chaces, as we'll as other
5 criminals, can in forty-eight hours reach
an asylum which retaliation is most likely
to provide.
From the Ne,o York World.
Section 5,27S of the Revised Statutes
Of the United States seems to be the law
foreshadowed in the constitutional pro-
vision:
aWhenever the Executive authority of
z any State or Territory demands any per-
( SON as q fugitive from justice of the Ex-
ecutiye authority of any State or Terri
torysto which such person has fed, and
produces copy of an indictment found
or an affidavit made before magistrate
of any State or Territory. charging the
person demanded with having committed
treason, felony ,or other crime, certified
: as authentic by the Governor or Chief
Magistrate of the State or Territory from
whence tho person 80 charged has fled, it
shall the duty ofthe Executive authority
of the State or Territory toswhich such
person has fed to cause him to be arres-
ted and secured, and to cause notice of
the arrest to be given to the Executive
Z authority making such demand, or to the
agent of such authority sppointed to re-
sceiye the fugitive, and to cause the fugi-
tive to be delivered to such agent when
he shall appear"
1t is not claimed that the Executive
authority of South Carolina failed in any
way to comply with the terms Of this law,
and, under the Federal constitution and
statutes. it was the duty of the Governor
of Massachusetts, to surrender Kimpton.
The fundamental law regulating the in
tercourse of the States denied him the
privilege which Great Britain assumed in
: refusing to surrender fugitive under the
extraditiou treaty. He could not ques-
/, tion the good faith of South Carolina.
It is hard to see how any State statute
can make the extradition of fugitive
from Justice matter of discretion in the
face of the law, as given above. To
carry such q system of interstate relations
TO q logical conclusion would render the
punishment of criminals in our commu-
nifty discretionary with the Executive
authority of another, since communica-
], tion. between the States is so easy that a
fugitive with few hours start would be
certain to escape. State comfy would
s be at an end, State borders would have
TO be guarded and our various common
Yealths would be to each ether like for
e;gn nations. If Governor Rice in an
oyer-zealous anxiety for the preservation
5 of State rights had merely asserted that
The surrender of Kimpton was matter
discretionary with himself, and then in
The interest OF. Justice remanded the pris-
ouerto South Carolina for trial, we might
have admired him as q conscientious but
wrongheaded theorist. But when the
assertion of the right to exercise his dis
cretion is followed by the liberation of
Z the. knave, We must regard him as the
willing friend of q malefactor, the ally of
she plunderers Of sister State, the ac-
cessory after the fact of the worst knsve-
ries of the carpet-bag governments. So
far as the future relation of the States is
concerned, the main question is whether
Che attitude of Massachusetts is constitu-
tional. So far as Governor Rice is con-
cesned, IL is no matter whether he had
discretion or whether he believed he had
discretion, since he is accountable for the
use which he made of the discretion he
assumes to have. The revelation of his
prejudices would not have been more
starting if he had refused to recognize
Wade Hampton as Governor of South
Carolina and handed Kimpton over to
his counsel, Chamberlain, on the ground
that that gentleman was the de jure Ex-
ecutiye of the PROSTATE State.
From the Boston Herald, Ind.
The decision of Governor Rice refusing
warrant for the rendition of Hiram 81.
Kimpton on requisition from Governor