The evening times., 1895-11-21
NOVEL LEGAL QUESTION
Habeas Corpus Case Of Dr. Geo. A.
Whittan Before Supreme Court.
Unusual Combination OF Circum.
stances In q Celebrated Con-
nectfcut Murder Case.

me habeas corpus case of DR.. George A.
Whfffen VI. Charles A. Tomhnson, sheriff
OF New Haven county, Conn.,, now before
tne Usifeu States Supreme Court, pre-
sents an unusual combination of cdrcum.
stances. and most novel question for the
decision Of the court.
The facts. as disclosed by the records
and Pleading Of counsel. are these: DR..
Whitten. while a resident OF New Haven,
was tried by local court upon the charge
OF murder in the second degree, and dis
charged He remained In Ne W Haven fora
long time afterward. during, at least, two
sessions Of the grand jury. and then re-
moved to Newton, N ass, early in the
year 1894
In January, 1895, he was arrested and
extradited from the State OF Massacha-
sets upon the deman0-of the governor
OF Connecticut, who alleged that an in
dictment had been found by the grand
jury OF New Haven county against him
for the crime OF murder. After being re-
turned to New Haven. he was admItted
to bail January IT. 1895, pending his ap-
pearance before the superior court of New
Haven county. The bond was fixed at
$4,000, and Lucius B. Herman became
surety thereon.
In March, Herman, fearing that bis prin-
cipal Intended to abscund, surrendered W hit
ten to the custody of the sheriff, a nit
timus for his confinement being issued by
John 8. Fowler, justice of the peace.
Thereupon whitten sued Ia the district
court of the United States for his release
from custody. in bis petition averring that
no Indictment was ever found against him
by any grand jury In Connecticut; that any
pretended Indictment was found by mistake
or misconception, and that at the time of
his extradition rrom Massachusetts he was
not a fugitive from justice from Connecti-
cut
Judge Townsend refused to release Whit
ten, and from that decision whitten ap-
pealed to the supreme cnurt. The ground
of the judges action was that the ques-
tions raised by Whitten had not been passed
upon by the highest courts of the State.
and until they had been SO passed upon
the Federal courts should not undertake to
say that he was illegally deprived of his
liberty. He might obtain all the protec-
ton to which be was entitled in the courts
of the State.
In his argument in favor of the RELEASE
of WhitteD, his counsel. Mr.. W. H. Baker
asserts that his client is held in custody
upon process that Is void. that he was
illegally extradited from Massachusetts.
by fraudulent imposition upon the author.
tiles OF that State; that, In the cases cited
by Judge Townsend in support of his re-
fusal to release Whitten, the parties were
properly In the custody Of the State
officials; and that wbitten was entitled
to appeal to the Federal court, being a res.
ideBt of another State, and the State OF
Connecticut having no jurisdiction over
him.
Mr.. TiftOn E. Doolittle, states attorney
for New Haven county, contends that
the only questions receivable by the SUI
preme Court are such as are raised by
the record. the petition, the return, and
the motion to quash: that there is ar in
dictment pending against whitten in Con-
Decticut, and that he is being held for suf-
ficieDt cause: that, in the absence Of 9
claim by Whitten that he had been denied
protection in the State courts. the Federal
court had no Jurisdiction; that The Pre-
sumption is that the governor OF N5ssa-
chusetts surrendered Whitten upor Suf-
ficieDt evidence, that he was a Fugitive
from Justice.
= A decision may be expected within ws
or three weeks.