The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-06-21

thority OF the state from which he ned.
be delivered up TO be removed to the
state having jurisdiction OF the crime.
L. 8. Const.. art. 4, sec. z This pro-
vision not being seif-executinx. con-
gress. on February u. I5SS. passed an
act TO carry IL into effect, the sub
stance OK which Is now embodied IN
section sg.S OF the Revised Statutes and
which - a. follows.
Whenever the executive authority Of any
state territory demands any person a. .
fugitive from justice. of thu executive au-
shority # any state OK TERRITORY 10 which sarh
Person has sed. and protiace . COPY a an ia
dietnaens found ~ an aflldavis made before :
magistrate a. any state or TERRITORY. chAfyins
the person demanded with having committed
treason. feaans ar other crime, rertided -
auiheasic b. The scresnos o. enael m.tistfsss
son CHARGED has lied. il shall be the duty
Of the executive authority q the state OF ter
r1fcry To which such person has ned to rAuaa
him 10 be arrested and secured. and 70 cause
notice Of the arrest 10 be given 10 the execu-
tire authority mAAdng such demand. o. 70 the
agent at such authority appointed 10 receive
delivered 20 such agent when be shail sppeas-
IL no such agent appears within six mnnths
from the time 1T the srrest. the prisoner mar
be discharged All costs on expenses incurred
in the experimenting. securing and sransmit-
ting such fugitive TO the state OF territory
making such demand shall be paid By such
state % territory.
These provisions constitute the law
applicable 10 the extradition OF fugi-
tives from justice, and all that the
courts can do on habeas corpus pro-
ceedings is TO determine whether the
conditions prescribed by the constitu-
ton and laws OF congress hare been
complied with. It viii be observed that
there are three things requisite Ia or
der 10 authorize the executive author
ity OF state to extradite a fugitive
from justice. and they are these: First.
the accused must he demanded A. q
fugitive from justice by the executive
OF the state from which he fed. sec
ond. such demand must be accom-
panied by a copy Of an indictment
found or an affidavit made before
magistrate charging the fugitive with
having committed a crime in the de-
manding state; and third, such copy
of the indictment or affidavit must b
certified by the executive OF the de-
mandIng state 10 be authentic An
extradition warrant. In order 10 be
valid. should show upon its face q COM
pliance with these requisite and neces-
sary conditions. In this instance the
warrant, or mandate. issued by the
governor OF this state recites:
Whereas, II has been represented 10 me hy
his s1csii,ssy. kassr w'ise:: so.sn9, q The
stands changed in said state with the crime II
eorrrpsinx juror b giving hriee cusnmis-
, !. aae ,s,s,s, s,,v So ~ s y ss'o '.s.
STATE. and has taken refuge In the state u
Washington. and.
Whereas, tae SAID sovsrnor q the state q
Massachusetts has, rssrsusnt 10 the constfsa-
tinn add laws Il the nfsed State demanded
q me thst eanse the said John T. Fore 10
be arrested and delivered to MickAsi J. Nor~
ria unt son<t ia kxr< 49,.
their custody and convey him bArk 20 aid
state II Massachusetts,: and.
Where's. s.ia appropriation and demand
formation. iaifrtmect ard warrant whereby
the said John T. foye h CHARGED with the
said crime aud beins. fugitive from the JUS
tscc Of said state And having taken rafs,Re In
the state a Washington. which are certified
by said governor Of Massachusetts, to b duly
authenticated:
q the state u washinrtnn % hereby al.
tho-iss aad empower Michael J. AoSytss,y
TIE agent named in Mid demand. TO take the
ia this state. and transfer him 20 the line
thereof at the expense a. the said enmmoa-
wealth q Massachusetts,
And ! hereby command all civil officers
within the said state II Washington To asyors.
all neesiftsi assistance for the exscu,iou al
tbs warrant. etc.
An inspection Of this warrar. will
show that II recites all Of the conii-
tons requisite 20 Its issuance. ard the
exhibits accompanying the same. ana
set forth IN the return. show the ex-
istence q every fact recised In the
warrant. In fact, this warrant IL hard
ly subject 70 criticism II In subssan-
tally similar 20 the one held to be sur
ficient in People vs.. Donohos, - N. T..
An. ard none OF its recftaIs are dis
puted or disprc1ed by appellant.
II follows. therefore. that appellant
is not Illegally restrained Of HIS llb-
erty. and the Judgment of the lower
court - therefore affirmed: and u %
ordered that the same be forthwith
executed ANDEHs. J.
We concur:
DUNBAR. J.
FULLERTON. j.
REAyfs. J.