The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1880-01-16


oontt did In the eaae Of the People vs. Martin
| In determining the guilt or Innocence OF this
| ralptpr feel bound to examine and pass nuon
| the Legality of bis imp isopmsnt. and, inaned
Hae no great reason why court on habeas
| corpus could not,
| EAsline myself not only authorized but bound
| to go shlnd tho warrant of commitment In
this cnse. will IL st'poiles the ai1l 1aylt.
II dlenloaea The fact that more han two years
| had elnuaed bntweeu the oifanse charged nnd
| the commencement Of criminal proceedings.
| This clearly bars tho, prosecution under Ire :.
one ~ tho exceptions. II WINS made after me
| grand Jury had had ample time to ind ct fela-
tot was mhae without any com pia,n. Oh INA
| a most important fact, namely. bat The ralhtor
| spent some time In 1877. after tho ehsnse
| charged and the whole summer IF 1873 at Bhv
~. Louis. then leavlng Bay 1T, Louis IL 1877
aud returning In 1879 and remaining. ~ SHOWN
by the testimony. more than ak mon ne; "
uorrH the. presumption OF his being o tu9hive
from Justice -
Had these fHcts been dIsolosed, would The
Fxaeutve hive issued tho regnislttonY Wonld
Gov Nichols have isauad lita Warrant Tor mr.
| rest Ing the relatot rs fugitive from lustieef
| think not .
IL The oase Of er parie jenkins, Indicted by .
Hfate court tho court wont behind the tndicb.
mont because Of The suppression pt tho mate
ta fact that he WIS mn otIlaer of the Federal
government. exercising the functions Oh hts
office
Ia his case the suppression Of the fnes OF
hia returning to- II ~ III Louis aud remaining
was pr judicial To tho Ealht0T III lWl y mus VI
vitw II alTsets the prescription. to the benefit Of
which he Ia entitled In case he ts not y fugitive.
aud deprivaa him Of the advantage Of the ihll
disclosure to the Governors OF Mississippi hha
Louisiana,
But for tho purpose admit that Tho afTl 1avit IL
In duo form and fhirly made. would itiuratsh "
legal ground Tor the Governor OF Lonlslaha 10
Issue n warrant
This Ia 10 he tested by tho express workings
If the antutas OF this State. Pms aiag over s.c.
ton lota requiring tho Stnte making raduisi-
ttona to pay pll expenses attending The Hbpre-
hepaiun confinement aud delivery Of tho ptrtv
accused, we como to section toii, which de-
clHros:
81 shall ba tho duty Of The Governor to ro-
quire such avtlenoe of The guilt of tho person
~ charged as would be necessary to Justify ut
apprehension aud commitment for trial Ind
tne orlme charged boon committed within tho
State"
Can II be commended TINT ~ more copy OF nm
afIliHvit furnishes such evidence as would JUS,
tify the apprehension mud commitment fortrial
of my eifzAn IF Louisiana? Gertnialy II would
not Al er pdite aftl lnvit may aud does Justify
the apurehensun Of m accused, but could not
DO used oven AS evidence Ia % preliminary OK
smlnhti3 On.
It may he asked how tho Governor could got
such evidence. Tho lay elsa,iy pointa out tho
mode ttst, 1t could b. taken In preliminary
examination In Bay st. LauIs. or IA indictment
eonld have been found which would have been
suen evidence "a apn'em plnfed by law. or ha
could have rretsrrea the mater to ono Of the
iian 1913. which authorizes them to take owl
depee In esees Of fugluvea cite.
GDnnsel Tor tho pF0aaGutttx handed IN hts
printed brief after unexpe9ed delay. | have
read It attentivelV, and 0nd It n reileration Of
his points md authorities presented In argu-
ment. While no denies tho power OF n ht lte
court to 60 behind II warrant issued on ~ fsqui
. iton for any purpose. he says on page OF bis
brief:
4 know that State eourtz hove In several In
atauces exntGsHd hat Uuwor.
State courts never nOntf0vert the power OF the
Governor to dsliver fuglttvea. Tho only power
claimed Is to examine tho cause aud pr0esed-
ings upon which the warrant Il iasuaa. II suf-
fleent in law. tho power Of tho State court ends.
If the foundation or cause IL sufficient on Its
faee such Judgment Is conclusive aud not to
BIS trnvarsed.
But In such oases Ms tho celebrated case of
tho Mormon prophet Ia Illinois. WHOM pre-.
aentoi mHtterR not eoDciuslvn Ii was examined
Hpd tho prlsonsr discharged.
In almost II no. quite In every Sthte OF the
Union, courts have gano behiud warrants to
examine tho RuffeieDcy OF cHuee. and In
oral reported cases tho prisoners have been on
largad.
Tho prevent case is one 81 mere tnisdemaannr
passed unnotieed 10y tho aul horltiss OF Missis.
aippi for more than two ysfrs aud until ore
eeribed. There is no proof Of ileeing T. ON JUS
tiee aa there had not even beep warrant Ia
sued against him II H. not even disputed by
the proeecuttix's counsel that rrlator returnei
the ensuing yaar md spent The summer ut Bay
st. Louis, where the assault Is charged 20 have
been committed. Esyond the AFFIDAVIT pf the
proseentrix there liz no eyldsnee of his 5slnT
from lnEtire, his remaining In 1877 for some
time after the ofsnse charged Mt Bay 1T Lous.
mud agan returning there mud remaining six
appear to negative tho prstanae TINT he In n
fugitive from Justice. and " not - fugitive the
case y elearly prescribed by the statutes of
Louisiana nnd Mlssiasippt.
To hold that this amounts to fleeug from
Justice would endanger social intete 'urs7 be-
tween tbs Stntes. Certainly such ef pnrte nffi
dHaits are nnslly made. and when accom- panied
with the delays aud circumstances of this cas- o
mtght become II precedent for oppression and
estortion
Aided by the opinion Of the Attorney General
of this State TO tho Governor of this State with
authorities cited and the principles laid down
on page Gl2 Hurd on Hab 3Hs Corpus. strength
Gus my balief In tho vie W above enuneiated.
On the page raerrpd to II sHyA: Theirs must
hs an aetu Il Il 'eing from Justice" In tho nj
vice Of the Supreme Court of Maine given to
tho Governor In 1887. II Ia said
That each Governor has the right Of deter
mining the facts whether tho person charged
bs fugitive from Justice or not. aud la respect
to small crimes. ut least II thinks that the mere
production Of an indictment should not be- re-
Rnrded a. proof Of tho fact that the person In
dlcted Ia n fugitive.
When person who committed n crime In n
State whore he was temporarily sojourning de-
parted from 1t for hfs ordinary aud permanent
rs-idence In Pennsylvania be tprnry General
OF tho latter State advised the Governor tn reof
TINT the person could not b, considered n fngi- |
tive from Justice under the constitution and act
of Congress-"
These principles when applied to the facts Of
this case as disclosed by tho record leave no
doubt on my mind That the relator is Illegally
mprisnned and must be- enlarged.
Lot tho habeas corpus be- made absolute. and