Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1900-06-16
THE REFUSAL TO GIVE up 1aYLo o..

ne HErUSRl ~ GIVE UP TAYLOR.
me refusal Of Governor Mount. az
3lhdaana, to deliver up Governor Taylor
TO the Kentucky authorities upon the
= equlsltlon OF the executive of the latter
state has called attention to the power
OF the governor in such eases Consti-
tutional authority and precedent an
pear TO be against Indiana governor.
but circumstances are such in Ken
q lucky as toschallenge the right of such
q demand. The constitution of the
United States says, "A person chargae,
Z ~ any state With treason, felony or 9th
aer crime, who shall flee from Justice
and be found in another state. shall on
demand Of the executive authority of
he state from which he fled be de,iv-
cred up, to be removed to the state hay-
IS ing jurisdiction of the crime, and n
S 81 81 atute passed by congress in 1893 i'm
/ poses the duty Of surrender upon the
eSecutlNe4of the state in which the ac-s
cused is found. This is dearly rnanda-
tory. and Yet ii has been cues toned ~
& court, particularly as TO crime in on.
state not SO made by statutesin another.
such as extradition of slaves. And de-
spite the clearress Of the language. ii
+ mas been regarded as ,llUoted dl,es
ton whether the executive upon whom
the demand is made may obey or re-
fuse to obey it; whether his POKER il,
discretionary or imperative. IN Ken
lucky the federal courts have decided
that the governor has no discretion in
the matter. and this would seem 10 be.
the general legal opinion. In one case.
however exception is presented If th.
person demanded is IN confinement or
T under prosecution for a breach of the
laws of the state TO which he has gone
the state may satisfy the demand OF
her own laws first. Should the execu
tive, under any other conditions, refuse
for any reason To issue warrant for
the arrest of the fugitive, there is no
power that can compel him to do it,
i IS doubtless this state right that
Governor Mount falls back upon, and
the democra tic executive of another
state would hardly feel warranted un-
der his state rights views in attemptinc
to coerce sister state thru the invoca-
ton of federal authority. On the other
hand the refusal may have a retroact-
I've effect upon Indiana.s claim for
a
governor.
II ever there were valid grounds 70,
the refusal of requisition the case OF
Kentucky and Taylor present. it. Tay-
s Tor was lawfully elected governor and
deposed by partisanship. Republican
\ government was thus overthrown. The
trial of Taylor would be farce. Ii
would be like sending him to death
Governor Mount points out the fac,
that the indictment Of Taylor has fol
Its purpose the palliation of this crime
andis for the purpose of tfiverting pub
lie attention from this injustice by
81 making it appear that the man thus
Il robbed OF his office is murderer and
8 y
unfit to serve in the high capacity to
which he was chosen by the suffrages
Of the voters OF his commonwealth He
also declares that the setting aside OF
the enormous sum OF $1,000 as a re.
ward for the conviction of persons sus.
pected Of having been concerned in ths
killing Of Mr.. Goebel is Of itself ac-
cepted by all right thinking people as
tempting Invitation for the propag
ton Of wholesale perjury and pre-
MUM on moral and physical assassi-
nation.
Therefore he says: I'm the fearless
I: sxSecise Of an established right and in
& the performances Of q consideration.
d Saty. 4 sssenls4l e honor your reauisition