The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1904-02-26
JOHN C. BUTLER
Sash, Binds, Doors,
Paints, Oils, Glass,
Lime, Clements, Plaster,
20 Congress Street, West
TREATY RIGHTS INVOLVED.

Supreme Court Decision Will Bear
ON Greene and Gnynor Case.
Washington, Feb. 23.-Concealed be-
hind a prosaic motion of the solicitor
general in the United States Supreme
Court to-day is an extremely interest
ing legal proposition involving de-
cision, which may subsequently work
to the confusion of its sponsor. 1t
was merely a motion to advance the
case bearing the docket title of Hen
ry C. Petit, United States mar
shall for the district of Indiana, VS..
Thomas Walshe," and was made by
the solicitor general for Charles Fox,
of New York, attorney for H. B. NJ.
consul general at New York.
This proceeding is the beginning of
the end of the celebrated Lynchehaun
case. Under the assumed name of
Walshe Lynchehaun was arrested in
Indiana at the instance of the govern
ment of Great Britain, which demand
ed his extradition. The first step in
this international miXup was the is
suing of a warrant for Walshe by
a commissioner in the Southern dis
trict of New York, duly authorized
to act in proceedings for extradition
under the provisions of the treaty be-
tween the United States and Great
Britain. Walshe was apprehended in
the state of Indiana; habeas corpus
proceedings were instituted, resulting
in his release from custody by the
United States Circuit Cuort on the
ground that he was illegally arrested,
as he was outside the jurisdiction of
the commissioner issuing the warrant.
Prior to the handing down of this de-
cision it had been repeatedly held that
eXtradition proceedings could be exc
cuted in states other than the one in
which the warrant was issued and that
the person could be lawfully appre-
hended anywhere in the United States.
In taking this appeal from the order
of the Circuit Court it is desired to
have determined conclusively whether
or not warrants in extradition pro-
ceedings are limited in their execution
to the district wherein they are issued
or made returnable.
Paralleling this case in every impor-
tant particular are the Greene and
Gaynor extradition proceedings, in
which this government is contending
for the same Interpretation of the ex-
tradition law, based on the identical
treaty between the United States and
Great Britain. Before the Privy
Council of England, tribunal CORE
spending in dignity and Importance to
the United States Supreme Court, is
the appeal of the United States from
the decision of the Canadian judge,
Caron. He discharged Greene and
Gaynor from custody on habeas cor
pus proceedings on precisely the same
grounds upon which Walshe was re-
leased by the American judge.
That it is an extremely delicate and
complicated situation legal authorities
here unhesitatingly admit. They ask
what would be the result If the decision
of the lower court were affirmed by one
tribunal and reversed by the other. If
the highest courts, respectively, of the
United States and Great Britain should
hold different views regarding the IN
depreciation of the same treaty regu-
lations, what steps would be necessary
to bring about an amicable and salts
factory adjustment?
1t will be remembered in the Greene
and Gaynor cases that an extradition
commissioner in Montreal issued writ.
They were apprehended in Quebec,
where they had fed to be beyond Amer
lean jurisdiction. They were taken TO
Montreal and a Quebec judge imme-
diately issued a writ of hdbeas corpus,
which was served on the MONTREAL
taller He brought his prisoners,
Greene and Gaynor, back to Quebec,
where a curious and distinctively Ca
madam legal squabb1e ensued, which
finally resulted in the issuing of another
writ of habeas corpus by Judge Caron.
1t is from this writ, which permits the
freedom of Greene and Gaynor within
the boundaries of Quebec, that the
United States government has appeal
ed to the Privy Council of England.
The cases of Walshe in the United
States and Greene and Gaynor in Cam
ada are analogous in that this govern
ment contends that a warrant issued
by an eXtradition officer in one prov
ince in Canada can be lawfully served
in another, and Great Britain holds that
a commissioner in New York state au-
thorized to act in proceedings for extra
dition can legally cause the arrest of a
person in another state
The outcome of these legal strug-
giles in Washington and London is
watched with the keenest interest by
the profession here, involving, as they
do, the interpretation of treaty rights
that will be far reaching in its inn
portance. None the less interested are
Greene and Gaynor, in their Canadian
exile, and Lynchehaun, alias Walshe, in
his Indiana haven of refuge