Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1889-02-14

the state of Tennessee, and was in the
state of Illinois; and the governor OF
Tennessee made requsition on tie gov
ernor of Illinois for Jackson, under the
provisions of section 527S, Rev. ST. y. S.
Armed with these papers, the detec-
tive went to Illinois, obtained war
| rant from the governor of that state
for the arrest of Jackson, and arrested
him, and hurried him off to Tennes-
see, had him tried before justice of
the peace, and committed to jail.
Thereupon Jackson filed a petition for
writ habeds corpus, upon the ground
that his arrest and confinement are
unauthorized.
1t is insisted for the prosecution that
the mailing of the letter containing
the money in the post-office here, ad-
dressed to Jackson at Chicago, was, in
law q delivery to Jacks son, and that,
in consequence, this state has jurisdic-
ton, and, having such jurisdiction,
and the defendant being here, no mat
ter how, the authorities of the state
have the right to retain him in custo-
dy for trial. Section 527S provides
that "w henever the executive author
ity Of any state or territory demands
any person as fugitive from justice
y
or territory to which such person has
fled, and produces copy of an indict-
ment found, or an affidavit made be-
fore a magistrate of any state or terri
tory charging the person demanded
with having committed treason, fell
Ony, or other crime, certified as au-
thentlc by the governor or chief mag
1strate of the state or territory from
whence the person SO charged has fed ,
it shall be the duty of the executive
authority of the state or territory to
which such person has fled to cause
him to be arrested and secured" etc.
According to the provisions of this
law, there must be, not only the COM
mission of the crime, but the person
charged must be a fugitive from the
state in which it was committed, be-
fore the executive authority can be
called into action. Jackson was not a
fugitive. He had not, in all his life,
been in Tennessee; had never fled
from it; and his case did not fall with
in the positive terms of this law. The
oath of the detective was ia Sc, and
the governors Of the two states impos-
ed upon. The whole proceeding was
a fraud upon the law. If this arrest
and imprisonment are to be maintain
ed, the opportunities for wrong and
abuse of this law will be great and
widespread. Commercial transac-
tions are largely conducted by mail
and by telegraph. If the seller at one
end of the line, and the buyer at the
other, with the aid of detectives, in
the casees of dispute and controversy
between them are to be allowed, un-
der such proceedings as these, to have
the citizens of one state carried to an
pt hnr 70 tn fnr frio hn folc
allegation that the person charged has
fled, instances of oppression may not
be few. 1T seems to me that the gen.
eral government cannot stand by and
see its laws SO trified with and abused.
l is we'll settled, as [ understand it,
that where treaties between this gov
ernment and a foreign nation provide
for the extradition Of persons charged
with certain specific offenses, and
where eXtradition has been obtained
upon the ground that such an offense
has been committed the person whose
custody and return has been obtained,
cannot, when brought in the jurisdic-
ton of the court, be tried for a differ
ent offense, especially if it be not en-
braced in the terms of the treaty.
Such a case is not altogether analog-
Gus to the one in hand, but it tends to
show the good faith required between
nations. Certainly the same charac-
ter of faith should obtain between the
executive authorities of the different
states of this nation, which in many
respects are foreign to each other. 1t
seems to me that such authority
should not be held to the seizure and
removal Of citizen of it's state when
such seizure and removal were procur-
ed by fraud, falsehood ,and imposition.
1t is ordered that the petitioner be
discharged.
The above decision will be read with
interest by all lawyers and others
who believe in the personal rights of
the citizen under the Constitution of
the United States, the Bill Of Rights,
aud the Extradition Law of Congress.
While reading this decision it calls to
mind the actions of gang Of unscru-
pulous officials, who, few years ago,
unlawfully spirited away well
known citizen of Missouri, who had
never been in the state to which he
was taken or done any act there.
There should be some action by our
Legislature to make the laws of our
state harmonic with the doctrines laid
down in this decision and decisions of
like purport by the Supreme Court of
the United States and by most of the
state courts.