The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1901-11-12
Circulation Statement.
BeeI.hnm.. RcnI. TO nnrhln.

Governor BeCkhams reply TO Gov
erEcr DuIh bin OF Indiana. on the subject
OF the iatteI's refusal 10 surrender vii
liam s. Taylor as a fugitive from JUS
tice. is a paper which should be read
by every fair-minded person in the
United States Under ordinary circum-
stances il might be considered too Sc
we're fully to comport with the dignity
of the Office which Governor Backham
holds, but the circumstances are not
ordinary; they are most extraordinary,
and the Chief Executive Of Indiana re-
C-ives "a Castigatiou that he richly de
serves. He has violated his oath Of Of
neg: ne has hasrantiy disObeyed a plain
mandate Of the Federal Constitution.
and he has grossly misstated the pro-
Ceedines Of the court in which caleb
Powers was tried-au of which is made
perfectly clear by Governor Beclham's
letter
Whether the Kentucky Governor is
right in his intimatiOn, that in refusing
To surrender Taylor Governor Durbin
was paying a political debt and at
tempting TO pave his own way TO the
United states Senate. we. Of course
cannot know with certainty. But
whatever the ultimate fact may b.. the
circumstances are painfully suspicious,
and there is far more on the surface
Of the situation TO justify Governor
Reckham's imputation than there is. or
was, 10 sustain Governor Durbins as
PERSONS upon the Kentucky judiciary
In commenting upon this matter
short time ago, The Times remarked
that any evidence which Governor Dur
bin might have that the courts Of Ken
lucky would MOI give Taylor a fair
trial must of necessity, be ex parte.
and therefore insufficient TO sustain him
in his refusal TO honor the requisition.
But it seems that he did not even take
reasonable care TO see to il that his
eN parte Information was accurate. for
i'm his letter he completely perverted the
sense of a court instruction given 70 the
jury in the Powers case. He quoted the
judge as stating TO the jury that a de-
PENDANT could be convicted upon the
testimony of an accomplice, corr0bO-
rated by that Of another accomplice.
whereas the instruction actually given
expressly neEatived any such rule of
law. declaring that the defendant could
not be convicted upon the testimony Of
accompliCes unless il was corrob0rated
by other testimony connecting him with
the crime. Even if Governor Durbin
had been right in his statement IL
would not have justified him in his re-
fUsal, for the question was purely a
legal one for the courts 20 determine
II such was the law in Kentucky it was
no worse for Taylor than for any other
man charged with crime. II ii was not
The law it would be good ground for a
reversal Of the judgment IN the Su-
preme Court Of the State. which court
lad already set aside one verdict in the
case upon technical errors.
Every circumstance connected with
the actions Of Taylor in Indiana shows
that he knew in advance that Governor
DUThiu would not give him UP. and
that ne was resting perfectly secure in
that belief In every aspect Of the mat
ter the Governor Of Indiana has been
guilty Of one Of the worst executive
Uutrages ever perpetrated Ia the United
states, and it is by no means certain
that the history Of the country fur
nishes another as bad. II is 20 be hoDed
not, az all events and if Governor Dur
bin can strengthen himself politically
by such a course, then indeed has the
party which ne represents abandoned
the lofty ideals for which il has So long
claimed 20 stand