The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1888-05-15
KENTUCKY A WINNER.
7be HatfioId-Mccoy Case De-
,;Jed in Favor Of That State
rnsTICE FIELDS OPINION
cn.c-ln Elaborate Review
of tho Constitutional Phases Oh
,nc Questionable Law in the
Matter - Other News.

s.,.s, pgash the Intoaigo"og. mi,
S<Hs w,.~y<eroy, Y,T D. c., May l4.-The
e,,,.nr Court of the United States to
AZ Jar decided by a divided court not not tc Z
%, ':o, ,bc writ Of habcas in the case o.
%1', %,''',n, Mahon and a number of othel
i,.,.n. t,', Of West Virginia, who was ar
''" ,oJ in that State by Kentucky Off
' 81, ior participations in the murders
'." .io, out Of the Hatfleld-McCoy
,I, and confined in a Kentucky jail
c.ro,oor Wilson, of West Virginia,
,,,Is application to the United States
r,nit II Court of Kentucky for writ Of
yJ t,,a,. corpus on the grounds Of unlaw'
+I I.e,pre OF Mahon and his compan'
i ".. The writ was issued, but when
.,r,,d ' the Kentucky District Court
t.ipsed to honor it.. =.
In,,jcc Field in his decision SAID: IL
D'i, ,bc duty to secure the territory OF
W. State from IawlGss invasion from
Wy '%., states, and to afford the means OF
SS,,TTrocIingthcm S,Tr to return. The abduG-
& &SaToi Mahon by Phillips and his aids
wv ". made M as appears, from the return OF
,"snondcut 10 the suit and from the
srlSrs Of the court below, withoutany
r,,,aIt r,r or authority from the Governor
aiWcs, ' Virginia. 1t is true, Phillips
". amounted by the Governor OF Ken
,rrky as agent OF the State to receive.
W&,G3n & upon his surrender on the requi-
,,;"N % Int no surrender having been
r,d" thc arrest OF MahOn and his alb
Irction % from the State were lawless and
;SJcirnsiblc acts, for which Phillips and
Il. aids NAV Justly be punished under
;be laws Of West Virginia. The author
sy | from the Governor OF Kentucky
i1rpisbed no ground ior charging any
complicitv on the part OF that State in
,be wroIg done TO the State OF West
VIRGINIA, The accused had the rig Int OF
Insisting he should not be surrendered
Ia The Governor OF Kentucky by the
Governor OF West Virginia, except by
sct oi Congress, and was entitled to re-
lease from any arrest in that State, but
having been subsequently arrested in
Kentucky the question is not rs TO the
validity Of the proceeding in West Vir-
cinia, but as to the legality OF the deten-
ton in Kentucky.
There is no comfy between the States
by which person accused OF n criminal
nir,ns, in nnr can be turned over to the
authorities of the other in the absence OF
positive law on the subject. II there
were apy such comfy the enforcing OF 1t
would be- purely that OF courtesy. The
question nrcsented is, whether one in
dicted fora felony in one State, forcibly
abducted iromanOther State and brought
10 the State where he was indicted with
ont authority is entitled, under the Con-
s,itution, to release from detention
under the indictment, by reason OF such
forcibIc and unlawful abduction. The
detention Of the appellant is in violation
Of the provisions of the Fourteenth
Amendment OF the Constitution, that no
State shall make or enforce any law
which shall abridge the privileges or
immunitics OF citizens OF the United
State, nor shall any State deprive any
person OF life, liberty or property,
without due process OF law"
The decision upon the last point is
applicable to the case at bar, and is con-
elusive in this that whatever effect may
be given by the trial court to the illegal
mode in which the defendant is brought
before il from another State, no right is
violated BY disregarding it secured under
the Constitution or laws OF the United
States. 1t follows, therefore, that the
Judgment Of the court below must be
oil;rmnI