Morning journal and courier., 1885-08-13
NOT GRANTED.

I'ho HuDD4T0 RGeQunS1tAOm-NVrs DOO~
 little Decides Against It-Mr- Hub-
 bard Not . Fugitive From Justice.
 State Attorney Doolittle rendered his finding in the Hubbard acquisition case yes terday afternoon to Governor Harrison. The State attorneys opinion, which is appended, decides against the call for requisition and finds that Mir. Hubbard cannot properly be considered fugitive from justice," as the Missouri lawyers phrased it. MT. Hub bard, on being communicated the new ot the finding. smiled and said he expected that f such would be the outcome of the case, and averred that he had no objection to taking a trip to Missouri as soon as busihss matters permitted. Governor Harrison, upon MT. Doolittle's report, declined to issue warrant | in the case. The opinion of the State attorney read as follows:
 To His Excellency Henry B. Harrison, Gov ernor of the State of Connecticut: SR-In compliance with your request I have investigated the ground of the demand of the Governor of Missouri upon you for the apprehension and delivery to the agent of the State of Missouri of Harlan P. Hub bard of New Haven, Connecticut, and re- spectfully report:
 
 counselors and representatives of the State of Missouri, MT. Hubbard and his counselor, Mr. Case, appeared before me this day and were fully heard.
 find that the copy of the indictment pre- scented to you contains 8 charge of perjury made in conformity with the laws of Missou ri, and that perjury is crime by the law of that State.
 The acquisition of His Excellency the Gov ernor of Missouri states: 'tThat it has been represented to him that said Hubbard has fled from the justice of that State and has taken refuge within the limits of the State of Connecticut D of James w. Boyd, Esq, the prosecuting at torney of Buchanan county, Missouri, oc- companying the requisition, in which he states s'that said Hubbard is fugitive from justice and he believes is at this time in the State of Connecticut, that being his residence" and it didn't appear before me that any other or further evidence was sub mitted to the Governor of Missouri. I am clear that the law requires that each Govern or must determine for himself whether the demanded person has fled from justice, and before me additional evidence was intro duced, and find that a suit was pending as stated in said indictment, and that said Hubbard appeared before said Tyler on the 23d of September, 1884, and presented claim against said assigned estate of about $33, 900, and that hearing upon said claim was continued until the Sth of October, 1884 when the evidence was closed. Said Hubbard was present during that period and testified in support of his claim, and on the 9th of October, 1884, said cause was argued anG said Hubbard present at said argument, and in said argument it was claimed by the ad verse counsel that he had committed per jury, as will appear by printed copy of an agreement which submit herewith. After the argument the assignee announced that he would render his decision in about ten days.
 Mir Hubbard thereupon stated that he should pass the intervening period at 8 speci fled hotel in Chicago and did do SC, returning to hear the decision of the assignee. MT. Hubbard left St. Joseph where the hearing was had on the 11th of October two days after the argument and returned to StJoseph on the 18th of October. The decision was nounced on the 18th, but in consequence of a clerical error the decision was modified on the 20th of October. The assignee allowed $10, 300 on MT. Hubbard's claim. Both par ties appealed from that decision to the Cir cult court for Buchanan county and said cause is now pending therein, and has con tinued therein for causes which I deem it unnecessary to detail.
 The next trial term commences about the middle of September next. MT. Hubbard heard immediately after the argument that he was to be prosecuted for perjury and re- maiped day or two, then went to Chicago and returned as stated above, and on the 20th of October, after the decision was nounced, procured bondsman for his appeal, about midday went to Kansas City in Missou- ri to see his counsel and attend to some oth- CT incidental business. His counsel, who had been in attendance at the United States court in Kansas City, returned and he did not meet them. When he left St. Joseph he was uncertain whether he would return, and he took his room key with him and did not pay his bill at the hotel. MT. Hubbard left Kansas City the same evening about 9:30 for his home, meeting MT. Judson, one of the parties mentioned in the indictment, at Cameron, about seventy miles east of St. Joseph, and travelling in company with him across the State of Missouri and as far east as Buffalo or Rochester. MT, Hubbard is engaged in an extensive business, with rami- fcations extending through the entire coun try, and testifes that he shall attend the first term of the court at which trial can be had of said case, now pending as above stated.
 Mir. Hubbard states that he went to Mis- souri to attend the trial of his canse and re- turned some days after the trial was practi- cally closed to his home in Connecticut.
 Under these circumstances do not think it can be justly claimed that MT. Hubbard has fled from the justice of the State of Mis- souri, and in my opinion he ought not to be surrendered.
 HILTON E. DOoLITTLE,
 State Attorney.
 New Haven, August Il, 1885.
 Obituary Resolutions.
 At meeting of the official board of the George street Methodist Episcopal church, New Haven, Conn.,, held at the church Tues day evening, August 4th, 1885, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted;
 Whereas, our beloved brother, William O. Armstrong, has been removed from his la bors on earth to his rest and reward in heav- en, therefore
 Resolved, That by his death we have been personally bereaved of true and faithful friend, and the church of 8 wise counselor, generous supporter, and 8 most devoted and successful Christian worker.
 Resolved, That the noble spirit of Chris tian charity ever manifested by our brother,