New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-02-24
TREATY RIGHTS INVOLVED
Supreme Court Decision WI Bear
on Greene and GayHor Case.
fTnoN TH1 TRInUNE BUREAU. ]

Washington. Feb 23.-Coucealed behind
rrosaic motion Of the Solicitor General in the
United States Supreme Court to-day IS an eX-
trer,eIy interesting legal proposition involving
a decision which may subsequently, work 10 'he
confusion Of its sponsor. Il was merely mo
ton 10 advance the case bearing the cocke'
title OF Henry c. Petit United States Marshal
for the District OF Indiana. VS.. Thomas Walshe'
and was made by the Solicitor GeIeral for
Charles Fox. Of New-Nork attorney LOT 4. D.
NJ consul general at New York
This proceeding is the beginning Of the end
Of the celebrated Jynchehaun case. Under the
assumed name OF Walshe Lynchehaun was ar
rested in Indiana at the instance Of the govern
rnent Of Great Britain. which demanded his eK-
tradition. The first step IN this internatoha'
mixup was the issuing OF a warrant for Na!she
by a commissioner in the Southern District OF
New-York duly authorized 10 act in proceed
ings for eKtradition under the provisions OF the
treaty between the United States ana Great
Britain. Walshe was apprehended In the state
OF Indiana. babeas corpus proceedings were IN
stitured resulting in his release from custody by
the United states Circuit Court on Lle sIoul.N
that he was illegally arrested, as ne was ou'-
side the jurisdiction OF the commissioner lssul"s
Prior to the handing down Of this decision it
had been repeatedly held that eNtraullloh pr
Ceedings could be executed iu States oiher Inal
the one in which the warrant was issued and that
the person could be lawfully apprehehded an.
where in the United States. Ia taxing mis- 'if
peal from the order Of the Circuit Court u IS
desired 10 have determined conclusiyely /" hetIlel
or not warrants in extradition proceedings al
limited IN their execution 10 the district wherein
they are issued or made returnaole.
ParalleluC this case I'm every important par
ticular are tbs Greene and Gayuor eNtraditon
proceedings. in which this government Is con
tending fo- the same interpretation OF lhe 81
tradition law. based or the identical treaty ne
tween the United States and Greas brltdlI.
Before the Privy Council Of England, tribunal
corresponding IN dignity and Importance 10 u'e
United States Supreme Court, is the appear OF
the United States from the decision 81 the
Canadian fudge Caror. lie discharged Greene
ana Gaynor from custody on habeas corpus pro-
ceedings or precisely the same grounds upon
which Walshe was released by the American
judge.
Gated situation legal authorities here unhesltat-
ingly admit They ask what would be the re-
suit if the decision OF the lower court We're
affirmed by one tribunal and reversed by the
other. II the highest courts respectively, 81
the United States and Great Rritain should
hold different views regarding the lnteIprel1-
ton Of the same treaty regulations. what steps
would be necessary 20 bring about an amicabie
and satisfactory adjustment
1t will be remembered in the Greene and Gay
nor cases that an extTadition commissioner IN
Montreal issued a writ They were ,appre-
hended in Quebec. where they had fed 10 be
beyond American jurisdiction. They were taken
TO Montreal and Quebec judge immediately
issued a writ Of haheaS corpus, which was
served on the Montreal jailer. He brought his
prisoners Greene and Gaynor. back 10 Quebec.
where a curious and distinctively Canadian
legal souabbe ensued which finally resulted in
the issuing OF another writ Of hsbeas corpus by
Judge Caron It Is from this writ, which per
nits the freedom az Greene and Gaynor within
the boundaries Of quebec that the United states
government has appealed TO the IrlTy council
OF England.
The cases Of Walshe IN the United States and
Greene and Gaynor in Canada are analogous in
that this government contends that a warrant
issued by an extradition officer IN one province
in Canada can be lawfully served I'm another.
and Great Britain holds that a commissioner in
New-Tork State authorized 20 act IN proceed
ings for extraditon can legally cause the arrest
OF a person in another State.
The outcome OF these legal struggles In Wash
ington and London is watched with the keenest
interest by the profession here. involving. as
they do the Interpretation Of treaty rights that
win be Tar reaching In fits importance. None
the less interested are Greene and Gaynor 81
their Canadian exile and LynchhauE, alias
Walshe, in his Indiana haven OF refuge.