The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-04-24
COST FALLS ON COUNTY
ATTORNEY GENERAL GIVES OPIN-
ION ON EXPENSE OF EXTRA
DITING CRIMINALS
STATE is LEGALLY LIABLE
legislatures Have Failed to Provide
for Payment of Necessary Costs,
and Counties Must
Stand Them.

Attorney General Douglas yesterday
handed down an official opinion upon the
subject of the requisition of fugitives
from justice that will be of vital interest
to all the sheriffs of the state and other
officials of a similar character Features
of the extradition law have long been
matters of perplexing import in this
state and the opinion Of the attorney
general offers a solution which may af-
ford criterion for the future. The
opinion Is rendered upon the request of
G. w Maryland, county attorney Of
Freedom county, where, 1t appears, ad-
ministrative officers were involved In
dispute as to the proper bodies by whom
the matter of expense for eXtraditing
prisoner should be borne.
In the very beginning Mr.. Douglas
elucidates the problem by stating that
Gin the matter of requisiton of fugitive
from justice from this state, the state
shall pay the expenses Of returning the
prisoner" This bears directly upon
the question at issue. Some officials have
held that the state should bear the eX-
pense, while others have adhered to the
theory that 1t should devolve upon the
county interested. AS matter of fact,
this latter Is the common view, and 1t
has been complied with to the extent
that nearly every county in the state
was the correct procedure and paid
the expense without applying to the
state But some counties, Hennepin,
for instance, have risen to question the
propriety of this method, and as result
there are claims now pending In that
county which may be released upon the
basis of Attorney General Douglas de-
cison.
By the opinion given by Mr.. Douglas 1t
~ riolo fIIY@o
through it's failure to perform it's entire
duty, is responsible for the counties bear
ing an expense which belongs to the
state The legislature in recent sessions,
the attorney general points out, has ne
elected to provide sufficiently In it's APP
preparations for this expense by the state
and as a consequence the burden has I'M
justly fallen upon the counties. This
error or neglect has become so f1agrant
that according to the statements of the
attorney general all writs for acquisitions
issued by the governors in the past f1f-
teen years have been made with their
execution dependent upon the county's
paying the expense. This he holds to be
a positive wrong, which at once appears
to be a gross imposition upon the coun-
ties.
PRACTICE BASED ON CUSTOM.
thorize the county commissioners to al
low bills Of officers who have been en-
gagged in this work; custom, and not law,
has delegated this power to the commits
S1oners. In the presence of these facts
the attorney general does not feel war
ranted in saying that any obligation ex-
lists upon the part of the county He
frankly states that, by q long period of
practice, executive, county and state Of
,1e~Ey,
tive construction and the legislatures
have assented by remaining silent and
this seems to be the only substantial
grounds for the rule. Coming directly
to the question, Attorney General Doug
las says:
Under the circumstances, in my judg-
ment, sound public policy requires that
this construction be adhered to until the
legislature acts In the premises.
1t often happens that a sheriff is the
man sent after a. fugitive from Justice
who is to be returned to the state upon
reqUisitton papers, and theoretically the
sheriff acts for the time being, in a dual
capacity, that of sheriff and state agent;
for the official who performs this duty
is appointed by the governor, and thus
becomes the states official or agent
In this lies the possibility Of confusion
or misunderstanding as to which shall
ty A private citizen may be designated
by the governor for this work, however,
as we'll as a sheriff or other officer.
Whoever this person may be, the attorney
general holds that, for the time being,
he loses his identity as any other official
than that of state agent, appointed for
the sole purpose Of this act under the
warrant of the governor.
REASONABLE COMPENSATION.
In this connection another important
feature of the compensation proposition
suggests itself The legislature has
failed to determine upon the amount Of
compensation to which the state agent
is entitled, but the attorney general holds
that he should be allowed reasonable"
compensation, with all expenses, neces-
sarily incurred, borne. Proceeding, he
adds:
Perhaps a different rule as to COM
pensation could be invoked if the admin
istrative officers Of the county advised
and the sheriff who happened to be des-
1gnated as the agent of the state. upon
reaching the boundary line of the state
with the prisoner should see fit to theo-
retically change the capacity In which
he held such prisoner and to receive him
from himself as such agent in the ca
pacity of sheriff under the writs issued
by the courts of the respective counties -
IL CnlS SORT OF ScnGme could be Ope-
rated Mr.. Douglas points out that a
fascinating argument could be advanced
that the sheriff would be entitled to all
fees and mileage for the trip and that
they should be paid out of the county
treasury. To preclude the possibility of
this, however, the law has deereed that
in no other capacity shall an official
making this character of arrest be known
except that as state agent, and if he
be a sheriff, for the present he has lost
his claim to that title and office.
Summarily Mr.. Douglas maintains that
the county should continue to nav the
expenses Of the sheriff for the present.
at least, or until the legislature makes
an appropriation sufficient to meet the
demands. There is now but $1,000 avail
able annually for this contingency, and
the expenses usually reach about $40 900.
He favors paying the sheriff nothing
but his regular So day for such work
=, IL u