The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-01-18
THE CARE OF CHILDREN.
4 Proposition to Enforce the MINI
tcnancc of Offspring.

A Proposition to Enforce the Mnin-
tcnnncc of Offspring.
The Attorney for the District yesterday
| submitted a favoia ole opinion on the bill
now before Congress providing for the
compulsory support OF children in the
| District The bill was introduced in the
Senate December g. by Senator Mcmillan.
Chairman of the District Committee, at
| the instance of the District Superintendent
/ OF Charities, Herbert W. Lewis
The measure provides that any person
| in the District of Columbia who shall
willfuliy and unnt cessarily refuse or neg
| lect to provide for any child under the
age of fourteen years Of which he or she
shall be the parent or guardian such food
clothing. and shelter as will prevent suf-
fering and secure the safety of such child,
shall be deemed guilty of misdemeanor,
and upon conviction thereof shall be sub
jected to punishment by a fine OF not
more than 500 or by Imprisonment in
the workhouse for not more than three
months, or both such fine md imprison-
ment. II further provides that when it
appears that a child has applied for COM
mitment TO the. Board of Childrens Guar
dams. whose parents are able to support
II, the child shall be committed and the
parents shall be required to contribute TO
its support. Failure TO comply with this
provision of The act is punishable by
penalty consisting of three months inn
prisonment in the workhouse. If any per-
sons cited above shall move fron. the
District they shall be treated as fugi.ives
from justice. the bill provides and be re-
turnable under the provisions made for
the return TO this jurisdiction of fngitives
from justice.
In connection with the bill Attorney
Duval states:
The object of the bill is well indicated
in its title, and the bill itself appears to
be in good form, except there should be
inserted in section 3, at line 10, page 3,
the words 'or that may thereafter be or
dered to be paid by said court. and sec
ton should be amended as hereinafter
indicated.
The only provision in the bill which, It
occurs TO me. may afford occasion Of legal
controversy is section 4, which provides
for the extradition. as fugitive, of any !
person who leaves the District and DISC /
beys an order for contribution toward |
maintenance, etc.
The last clause OF that section pro-
vides: And for the purpose OF such re-
turn or removal 10 the District of Column |
bia under such order it shall be considered |
as an indictment and have the same force
and effect
Il am not prepared to say that this pro-
vision, while novel, is not enforcible.
The Constitution of the United States |
declares (Article ". paragraph 2, clause !
p: A person charged in any State with (
treason, felony. other crime. who shall /
flee from justice and be found in another
State, shall, on demand of the executive
of the State from which he fed
be delivered up to be removed TO the State
having jurisdiction OF the crime
While there is in the Constitution no
express grant to Congress of legislative
power to execute this provision. still The
supreme Court Of the United States has
held that Congress. by its act approved
February u, 1893 list Statute 1922, now
embodied in sections 52Ts and 52Ig OF the
Revised Statutes Of the United States. has
'ightfully legislated upon the subject.
Roberts VS.. Riley. 1ss T. S S0)
And while section 527s. r. s. L. s, re-
luires the production Of a copy of the
Indictment. etc. as one of the preTequi-
ties for eItradition OF fugitive from jus
ire, the Supreme Court has decided in
he matter of Louis Reggel, Ola L. s.
32), that section 527S embraces every Of
ence known TO the law OF the demanding
tate. including misdemeanors.
But irrespective OF the provisions OF
ections 527s and 5279 r. $. L. S, It is
within the competency of Congress to pro-
ide for extradition as in this bill proposed
Such legislation would be but the ex
rcise OF the same authority under which
aid sections themselves were enacted.
This law without some provision for ex-
-adition could be easily circumvented, and,
as ] am unable to suggest bet
sr scheme than the one provided in Sec
on 4. would advise its retention.
The phraseology OF this section. how
yer, should, in my opinion, be changed.
nd ] accordingly suggest the following
lbstitute therefor;
" Section 4. That If any person against
'hom an order for contribution to-
fard maintenance shall have been made
5 provided for in this act shall leave
he District OF Columbia. and shall
all TO obey such order, such person
hall be deemed 10 be a fugitive from JUS J
ice and shall be returnsble under pro-
isions of law heretofore made. or which
lay hereafter be made for the return OF
Igitiyes from justice. and for the purpose
Z such return or removal to the District
( Columbia under such order il shall be i
onsidered as an indictment within the
ieaning of section 527S Of the Revised
tatutes of the United States, and have ,
ne same force and effect !,