The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-09-13
THE wALsH-LYNCHEHAuN CASE.

1t is now evident, as the Journal pre-
dicted at the beginning, that the Walsh
Lynchehaun case will become a leading one.
From a popular point of view it is interest
ing on account of the nationality of the
defendant and the semi-political considera-
tions involved. These are OF special inter-
est to Irish-Americans. who would other
wise fad nothing in the case out of the
ordinary. Extraditions from one country
to the other under the treaty are not un-
common, though, with modern detective
machinery and the knowledge that the law
can lay its hand on a fugitive criminal in
either country almost as easily as it can
in the country he fees from, fugitives are
apt to seek a country where they will be
more difficult to find and which has no
extradition treaty. The submarine tele-
graph outruns the fastest steamer, and a
fugitive criminal from England to the
United States, or vice versa, is apt to be
met on his arrival by detectives with a
description of him and a warrant for his
arrest. Generally the process of extradition
is simple, unless there is some legal COM
plication. In the case OF Walsh or Lynche-
haun, there is some presumption Of his
innocence in the fact that he came to a
country where, il guilty, he must have
known that the British authorities would
surely find him. and that, under the treaty
he would almost certainly be surrendered.
1t is hardly necessary to say that from a
legal point OIL view the fact that ne is an
Irishman and that his alleged offense grew
out of his trouble with a land owner, cuts
no figure in the case. That is of interest to
krish-Americans, but the law takes no
notice of it. Neither does the fact that the
| penalty imposed by the British court was
more severe than could have been imposed
| under American law cut any figure in the
case. The only questions involved, as far
as the American courts are concerned, are
whether Walsh is really the person wanted,
| and whether the evidence on which he was
| convicted was such as would convict him
of the offense charged in this State. Coun-
| sci for the British government must satisfy
| the United States commissioner that Walsh
is the man who was convicted and sem
fenced by the British court under the name
| of Lynchehaun, and that the evidence on
which he was convicted was, in character
and competency, sufficient TO have con-
victed him in an Indiana court. If the
commissioner is satisfied on these two
points, he will have no choice but to so find,
thus virtually turning the defendant over
TO executive authorities for surrender.
Even then, however, an appeal will be to
the higher courts, and finally to the
Supreme Court of the United States, whose
decision on the legal points involved would
be final. This court would probably review
every legal step in the case, including
Judge Bakers decision that the writ issued
by the United States commissioner in New
legal point of view this is the most i'm
portant question in the case, and the de-
cision OF the Supreme Court upon it would
establish a precedent.
From a popular point of view Walsh is
entitled to sympathy as "A man who has
probably already suffered sufficient punish
ment for a comparatively light ~offense, but,
unfortunately for him, sympathy can find
no place in the construction of the treaty
and the law of the case. From the British
from justice as If he were the worst crimi-
nal in England, and the American courts
will have to construe the treaty and the
law as unsympathetically in one case as
thew would in the other.