Richmond planet. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1883-1938, 1895-01-19
Judge BIsAWsltsP's Decision
He DISCHARGES THE AL
LEGGED FUGITIVE.
The Legal Aspect Of the Case
HUMAN RIGHTS PARAMOUNT.
Life Must be Held Sacred and tht
Guarantees OF the Constitution
Respected.

to surrender A. II. Hampton, color
ed to Kentucky officer, when infOT-
nation had been furnished that the
prisoner would be lynched:
Estate Of Ohio. Hamilton County,
Court of Common Pleas. In the matter
of A. II. Hampton, fugitive, in eXtradi-
ton proceedings. Opinion. Buchwslter
J. "This hearing is in extraditioD pro-
ceedings. The Governor Of Kentucky
made requisition on the Governor OF
Ohio for the prisoner as fugitive from
Justice. The Governor of Ohio thereup-
on issued his warrant to the Sheriff OF
this county. The prisoner was arrested
and brought before me, as one OF the
Judges of this Court. to be dealt with
according to law On the both day of
December, 1894. on partial hearing,
: the inquiry was continued to January
4. and, on it's final submission is now to
be determined.
con the first hearing it appeared that
the prisoner was named in the requisi-
ton as the agent of the State OF Ken
lucky. On the final hearing by leave of
Court substituted copy is made correc-
ting that error.
'sVarlous defects are now claimed in
the extradition officials documents. /
shall C1ly consider one, viz, whether, IN
effect, II crime is charged against the
pris0Dcr. In this regard Gov. Brown 6
- oisition recites that A. II. Hampton,
tive from Justice from the State OF
ntucky, charged with shooting and
Funding with intent to kill but does
BIT contain any recital OF any annexed
dictment, affidavit or document, OF
ourt record, or any reference thereto;
or is there any avertmeut specifying OF
harging crime against the prisoner, OF
Inv document attached or annexed e
he requisition.
THE oFFENsE CHARGED.
"The warrant of Gov. Mckinley re
Y cites the ofIense charged in the sam,
words shooting and wOunding Will
intent to kill, and then adds, N printed
form, AS appears by copy OF indict'
ment duly authenticated and ATTACHED
tn the requisitiOn aforesaid
The counsel for Kentucky offer in proc
Nwhat they claim is a certified copy of al
indictment against the prisoner, and /
y is agreed that it is true duplicate o
the paper described in the warrant q
an indictment.
''To this paper counsel for the prison
err object, in that it is not duly autbenti
Gated as a record. And they object, al
so, to the sufficiency of the requisftiol
and the warrant, as not stating a crime
"E. M. Brakeman certifes, rs Clerk G
Green Circuit Court, State of Kentucky
that the document is true copy OF a
indictment against A. S. Hampton, q
l found in his office, dated January
1895, duly signed, but without any oi
fetal seal.
"W. H. Milby certifes, as Judge {
Green County Court, that the same is
true copy of the indictment, &c, in I'll
Office of said clerk, aud subscribes tn
same with his official sigma ture.
There does not purport to be an
certificate or statement by the GovernC
of Kentucky that such paper is a cop
of an indictment of that, or any, Coul
in his state. In brief, there is no copy
an indictment, or other manner
charging crime against Hampton ioun
in any Court of Kentucky, certified
the Governor as authentic, as is specii
cally required by Section 527S of the r
Vised Statutes of the United States,
set out below, nor as to the further pr
vision of the Revised Statutes of Ohio
that regard. Nor, as is manifest, is SUI
purp0rted copy of the Indictment GER
fed according to the act OF Congre
>. OF
ST. as to the authorization OF Cou
records generally for use between t
States. there being no certificate th
Brakeman is Clerk of Mildly Judge.
THE LAW NOT COMPLIED WITH
Otis clear, therefore, that the law h
not been complied with as to product
the duly authenticated copy of the
dictment on which to found extraditiC
See Church on Habeas Corpus, s
AT, page $50, and note. And see
cussion of authorization by the &c
ernor in ex parte Sheldon, 81 o. S., 81
'The independent recital in the req
~ ~ 1t sch
- and WOunding with intent to kill, d.
not state a crime under the laws of X
lucky. Sec. 1166 las put in proof. ]
shooting and wOunding must be c
person. No presumption can be mt
against prisoner. He is to be adju
ed by strict construction of the cha
against him. Upon such papers g
records, therefore, as are competent
be considered, there is no crime charl
against the prisoner, and he can not
remanded.
cit is proper, however, that elea
state my position upon another feat
OF this case briefly adverted to by ms
the first hearing.
"The foundation of the extradit
system is the Federal Constitution.
,, Art. 4, of which says A per
charged in any State with treason, I
nv or other crime, who shall flee II
Justice ana De lOunO IN announcer Of
shall, on the demand of the execu
authority of the State from which
fed, be delivered up. to be removed
the State having jurisdiction Of
crime
ITO carry this provision into ei
Congress passed the act of February
1893, in relation thereto. The pr
sions of the first and second sect
have been re-enacted IN Sections
and 5279 of the Revised Statutes
which Section 527S is as follows:
Section 527S When the execu
authority of any State or Territory
mands any person as a fugitive I
justice of the executive authority of
State or Territory to which such pei
has fed, and shall produce q copy @
Indictment found or an affidavit n
before a Magistrate of any State or
ritory, charging the person demal
with having committed treason. fe
or other crime, certified as authenti
the Governor or Chief Magistrate o
State or Territory from which the
son 80 charged has fed, it shall b.
duty Of the executive authority o
State or Territory to which such pc
has fed to cause him Ito be arrested
secured, and cause notice to be give
the executive authority making sue
mand, or to the agent of such AUTH
appointed to receive the fugitive, 81
cause the fugitive to be delivered