The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-09-13
BAYARD,s LAW cRrrrCrsED.

Provisions of New York and Texas Laws ne
to Extraterritorial Jurisdiction4
Washing ton Special.
writer in the National Republican. who has
evidently made tho question of extraterritorial
jurisdiction the subject of careful study, cites
the opinions of Solicitor Wharton, of the State
Department, upon this subject, and adds:
"The best evidence that DR.. Wharton is sus-
tanned both by jurists and the American public
IN his exposition of eXtraterritoral Jurisdiction
is found in the fact that the statutes and codes
of the various States of the Union contain pro-
visions comforting jurisdiction upon the State
courts over ohenses committed beyond their ter
rtorial limits. Without extending this article
by numerous citations. it will be sufficient TO re-
fer TO the provisions of the penal code of 1881 of
the State of New York, which was framed by
the ablest lawyers and adopted after the most
thorough discussion and examination Section
46l OF this code provides that person who, be-
ing resident of this State does any act without
the State which would be punishable by the pro-
vision of this title Grimes Against the Pubhc
Peace, if committed within the State, is guilty
of the same offense and subject to the same pun
ishment as If the act had been committed within
this State The otfenses enumerated under this
title are quite numerous, and many of them
mere misdemeanors. But extraterritorial juris-
diction is declared in the broadcast sense by the
following:
Section 676. person who commits an Get with
out this State which affects persons property with
in this State, the public health morals decency
of this State, and which if committed in this Stats
would be crime, is also punishable if the act
committed within this State.
Section 67S. An act omission declared puA.
ishable by this code is less so because it is also
punishable under the laws of another State govern
ment country, unless the country is expressly de-
clared IN this code.
''It will thus be seen that the penal code of
the State of New York confers jurisdiction over
offenses committsd in foreign territory to
much greater degree than the Mexican CODE the
abrogation of which is demanded by Secretary
Bayard. The latter code has been very careful
ly drawn and Is limited in its application, while
that of New York confers jurisdiction for all
acts which affect persons or property within the
State, or the public health, morals or decency
of the State. In another respect it is broader in
i.s application. 1t is requisite of the Mexican
cooe that the offense should be a crime both in
tne country where committed and in Mexico;
whereas the New York code only requires the
act to be crime according TO that code"
The writer also quotes from the penal code OF
Texas 1870. as follows:
Article 454. Persons out of this State may commit,
and be liable to indictment and conviction for
mttipg, any of the offences herenbefore enumerated
forg of land titles and other documents which do
not in their commission necessarily require personal
presence in this State the object of this act being to
reach and punish all persons offending against its pro-
visions, whether within without the State, and in
dctments under this act may. be presented by the
grand jury OF Travis county, i'll this State ia the
county where the offense committed or in the
county where the land lies about which the ofense in
this act committed
Article 500. A conspiracy entered into in another
State Territory of the United States to commit any
one of the offenses named in Article S0f murder
robbery arson, burglary, rape, theft forgery in
this State shall be punished in the if
the conspiracy had been en7ered into in this State