The Waco daily examiner. [volume] (Waco, Tex.) 187?-1888, 1882-06-20
A NEW PHASE OF STATES RIGHTS.


the criminals OF another AT iirst glance
lawyer you'd reply that it cannot, for
the constitution Of the United Stn'as
the highest organic law in the land,
contains provision for the nrrest and
eItrsditiou of tho criminal, who viola
ting the laws OF one stat, fees for ref
uge into the territory OF another And
yet, as plain as the provision appears to
be, the question asked above In forcing
itself upon the consideration oi society
as proposition yet unsettled and likely
to not only cause trouble nnd hicker-
ings, but in many instances actually in
terfero with the administration OF JUS
tice. We all remember the nstouish.
ment created, about u ycnr aRu, by the
refusal OF the Governor ~ missouri 10
honor the reqnisitiOn OF Governor Rob
erts for the arrest and delivery Of Col
John L. Crisp, who was wanted IN this
state to answer to an old Indictment,
charging him with murder 1t wns one
OF the worry rare instRuccs ia the history
OF the country where Governor had
declined to exercise such an act
OF comfy. Another instance WAS
in Ohio, the executive Of TINT state ig-
norlng u requisitiuu from Indiana. SO
far IA Texas was concerned Col. CriRp
solved the difficulty himself, by yolun.
tarily entering the state, surrenderug
and standing trial His subsequent ar
| quittal is we'll remembered II wus hui
u few months after this that The Mil
sour Governor refuse to surrender ,
fugitive criminal from Tennessee, fui
| whom the Governor OF that state hut
issued reputation. This created NOR,
talk, especially among the legal light
OF both states, who quoted section
article four Of the national constitution
(as they did IN Col. Crisp's cnsel l.
demonstrate thRt the Missouri Guverno
had no option IN the matter, But des
pite this Gov. Crittenden oi Missour
stuck to bis toXt OF "no surrender" aut
when the Tennessee officials invoke
| iN''ihi INV 'bcy lOuHu Nloll bhtuNh
blocked by "a decision " tn
United states supreme court
We nre not able to cA
} plain this az clearly or IA elHborutely u
! II lawyer would, but it may be found b
the curious in the oath volume Of How
ards Reports, page G6. II Ii the case O
the state OF the state Of Kentucky w. y
Donnison, and 1t crystallHe' the doe
trine that u state cannot, through til
Judiciary or any other department q
the general government, be compelle
to deliver up n fugitive from justice ot
the demand of the executive Ot nuOthe
state. The court virtually "uupuncc,
that the constitutional article was to,
general to be ctiicHcious, and thnt moth
ing short Of more specific and care
fully drawn constitutional amendmont
to be ratified by two-thirds Of the stutos
would cure the defect. Mere con
grossional suHctmcnts on the subicc
were declared worthless And thus tn
matter stands, receiving fresh interes
from the fact that within the past week
the Governor Of Tennessee, remember
ing the recent action Of Missouri, hH
refused to surrender uotoriou
criminal, now fugitive from Missouri
justice, These pre- edcnIB are bccomin.
too tfrequont, and they are mis-
chiGvous and dangerous. Their lo,ic
outcome will be that the recovery o
fugitivss from Justice will be matte
| purely dependent upon thc whim, poll,
ical. personal, or otherwise, OF the COVER
nor upon whom the requsitiou IL mad,
a man may commit murder in Texa
and iee to Mexico. Gov. Roberts requi
sition will bring him bnck here, il h
eau be found in Mexico. lIc may eros
tho ocenn and stop i'll France or Eng
land. Our extradition ircaties will re
cover him. But II he gotta just ncros
the line, into Louisinnn or Arkansas
there IL no power competent To- compc
his return snve the personal iucluutioi
OF the governor OF lhc unighbofinl
stnte. This IL rather too much ut 4tntcH
rights, and 1t is to be hoped the lnwyer
in congress will commence stops t,
check the evil before 1t grows to trouble
some proportions, The United State,
supreme court has as good ns announce,
thnt n new constitutional amendment
properly drawn. will cure the drf"ct