Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-04-15

| correspondence uus pasSSu pe.WSSh
Governor Ireland, of Texas, and Gov
ernor McEnery, of Louisiana. relative
to Governor McEnery's refusal to issue
a warrant for the man Carroll, who was
wanted In Texas for taking out OF that
state mortgaged personal property,
civil offense, but no crime under the
laws of Louisiana:
aovERNoR IRELAND's LETTER.
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT., !
State of Texas.
Austin, April l, 1884. J
To His Excellency Samuel ID. McEnery. Gov
ernor OF Louisiana, Baton Rouge, La:
Sir--On the 7th day of March, 1884,
I issued requisition directed to your
Excellency, requesting the, return OF
----------- to this state, he being a fugi-
tive from justice.
On the 30th ultimo the requisition
was re.issued to this Office, bearing
the following remarkable indorse-
ment.
"Respectfully declined, as the of
Tense charged Is unknown to the laws
of this state, and there Is 10 affidavit
accompanying the application that
return of the. fugitive is for the pur-
pose of substantial justice and not for
the purpose of holding him liable in
a civil process to which he is liable"
First-The fact the oIfense charged
| Is not known to the criminal laws of
| the state whose executive is requested
tosurrender fugitive, is given as a
reason for declining TO surrender is at
least new and novel. 1t was supposed
necessary only to be satisfied that the
offense charged was really an ofionse
against the laws of the state making
the requisition.
Second-Iour second reason for your
refusal is an impeachment of the law
officers; of the grand jury, the judge,
who presided when the indictment
was returned into court, and the exec.
utive of the state. Here is a requsi-
ton, accompanied by duly certified
copy Of the bill of indictment, and yet
your declination is based
upon the ground that this
state and her ofIicia have
not purged themselves OF and made
proof of an absence of possible disgrace.
full attempt to use the criminal ma
chinery of this and sister state for
the purpose of collecting a debt with
out the slightest proof or fact tending
founded. am not aware of anything
in the past history of this state that
justiiies these suspicious or your course
In this matter. Laws may be prosti-
tuted here as they are in all civiliza-
ton, but they have not and will not
be so prostituted by the consent and
connivance of the government itself.
Y0n had the undoubted power, physi-
cally, to decline TO honor the reuuisi.
ton, but you had not the legal or NOR
al right to so decline. States recoy-
niziDg their common obligation to the
Federal Union, are legally and moral
ly bound to surrender fugitiyes when
n legaledemand IL made for them
That you cann t be compelled 10 obey
this legal and moral obligation was er-
roneously so decided in Kentucky VS..
Denison. 1t is not an unreasonable
supposition that had your excel
lency desired to learn whether the Of
Tense charged in the indictment was
really legal charge, that you could
readily have done so by reference to the
code OF laws Of this state. BY turning
to the revised statutes of Texas, Vol
could have seen and readily found, b,
the use of an excellent index, at nag,
lO3 Of the criminal code of that book
and at 7o7, that the oflense charge,
was felony. If you have not a con,
of our laws, ii will afford me nuci
pleasure TO furnish the state of Iouisi
ana with a volume. Why your excel
lency should look through the code O
Louisiana to ascertain whether tn
otfense charged was one known to tn
laws of Louisiana is not perceived
whether that question was solved II
the one way or the other could hay
no possible bearing on the question
1t is not inappropriate to alllide her
to telegram from your excellency q
date March 81, and some
time subsequent to Won
/: action IN the case here discussed. tel
ing me that there was prisoner 1
Q Jail In Terrell, In this state, for whor
you had issued requisition on tn
q governor of Texas, and requesting m
TO order the sheriff of Kaufman count
to hold until your requisition reache
this state. In answer, l wired yo
this morning that, since your action |
u the main case here discussed, | w,
not inclined to nsurp extraordinar
powers. Under the laws and form .
/. government, the governor of Texas h,
no authority to "ordern sheriff to d
rs anything. He may request, and ofte
. does, but never to violate the law
In your case, under different cond
tions, L would have taken great plea
ure III requesting sheriff to go TO Il
very verge of authority on your app
10 cation, but l must now be pardont
Al for cecliniDg and expressing my pr
10 found astonishment and regret at II
" course you have seen proper to pursu
II 4 am, sir, very Respectfully. vo,
y obedient servant. JNo IRELAND.
!, Governor of Texas.