The Mt. Sterling advocate., 1901-11-19

tnotlty vi the state Or territory 10 wiiicii
such person fed to cause him to be ar
rested and secured and to cause notice of
the arrest to be given to the Executive
authority making such demand, or to the
agent OF such authority appointed to re-
ceive the fugitive, and to cause the fupi-
tive, to be delivered TO such agent when
he shall appear"
SUPREME COURT RULING.
Observe that the word shall' is used
in both the constitutional provision and
in the statute. The expression, at
shall be the duty" does not allow any
discretionary power" But in order to
avoid any discussion whatever as to the
meaning of the law, let us examine the
the opinion of the Supreme Court of the
United States in regard to it. In the case
of Kentucky VS.. Dennison (6sth U. S.
Reports) where the Governor of Ohio
had refused to deliver a fugitive asked
Tor by the Governor of Kentucky, that
court, while refusing to grant the manda-
mus asked for, claiming that it had no
power to grant It in such a case, never
theless said, the Chief Justice delivering
the opinion of the court:
1t will be observed that the judicial
acts which are necessary to authorize the
demand are plainly specified in the act
OF Congress; and the certificate of the
Executive authority is made conclusive
as to their verify when presented to the
Executive of the State where the fugitive
is found. He has no right to look be-
hind them, or to question them, or to
look into the character OF the crime spe-
cited in this judicial proceeding. The
duty which he is to perform is, as we
have already said, merely ministerial
that is, to cause the party to be arrested
and delivered to the agent or authority of
the State where the crime was commit
ted. 1t is said in the argument that the
Executive officer upon whom this demand
is made must have a discretionary Execu-
tive power, because he must inquire and
decide who IS the person demanded But
this certainly is not discretionary duty
upon which he is to exercise any judg-
ment, but is merely ministerial duty
that is, to do the act required to be done
by him, and such as every Marshal and
Sheriff must perform when process,
either criminal or civil, is placed in his
hands 10 be served on the person named
in it. And it has never been supposed
that this duty involved any discretionary
power or made him anything more than
a mere ministerial officer; and such is the
position and character of the Executive
of the State under this law, when the de-
mand is made upon him and the requi-
site evidence produced. The Governor
has only to issue his warrant to an agent
or officer to arrest the party named in the
demand" 4"
IS UNTRUE ro HIS OATH.
commend the entire opinion in this
case for your perusal and study, with the
hope that you may profit by its instruc-
tion and not again, when dealing with
such matters, speak of discretionary
power" Remember, too, that the con-
struction placed upon the Constitution by
the highest court in the land becomes it.
self part of that instrument which you
took an oath when you became Governor
of Indiana to support. A comparison of
your letter with the decision of the Su-
preme Court is sufficient to show whether
or not you have been faithful to that oath
Passing on from showing how you have
disregarded the Constitution and law of
your country, | will proceed to show how
yon have perverted the record in the re-
cent trial of Caleb Powers and sought by
such an action to bring discredit upon an
honorable and upright Judge. whose life
of public service has been unstained by a
single dishonorable act, and whose char
acter as man and as jurist stands un-
iinpeached among the good people of
this State.
WHERE RECORD WAS PERVERTED.
You criticise the recent trial of Powers
and denounce Judge Cantrill for his in
structions to the jury. You say in your
letter he instructed it 'that it might CON
vict on the testimony of one alleged ac-
complice if that testimony was corrobor-
ated by that of another alleged accom-
plce; that II might convict the defend
ant for the act OF another man, to which
the defendant had never agreed, etc" To
show how untrue the statement is / re-
produce from the record the exact in
struction of the Judge in that case on this
point:
Eighth The jury cannot con-
vict the defendant upon the test-
mony of an accomplice or of &C
completes unless the testimony be
corroborated by other evidence
tending to connect the defendant
with the commission of the olfense,
and the corroboration is not suiii-
cient If it merely shows that the
offense was committed and the cir
cumstances thereof"
Is this manly way to attack anyone
Is it right and proper to manufacture ev-
idence to blacken, if possible. his charac-
ter? You insinuate, too, that the Judge
has been Influenced in his trials of these
cases by his aspirations as a candidate for
the United States Senate. If rumor speak
true, you are not above suspicion in that
respect yourself, and the rancorous spirit
of your letter shows that you are making
a bid for the implacables and radicals in
in your own party, with a view to that
end. | doubt the wisdom of your policy
to secure such an honor. The people of
Indiana love fair play, and although at
times stirred to high pitch of excite
ment in political contest, they are never
theless broad-minded, liberal and obedi-
ent TO the law My confidence in them
and their civil institutions Is so great that
will never, while Governor of Kentucky
cast reflection upon them or upon their
courts by refusing TO surrender to them a
violator of their laws when properly de-
manded, even though the fugitive should
be of my own political faith and charged
with conspiring TO murder his political
opponent whom he could not defeat 9TH
erwise. The good people Of your State