Montpelier examiner. [volume] (Montpelier, Idaho) 1895-1937, 1906-08-24

told, as follows:
A criminal complaint duly sworn
to, was fled before the probate
Judge of Canyon county, charging
defendants with the offense with
whieh they have since been regular
ly indicted. Upon this complaint
warrant was issued, and the same
accompanied by the statutory show
ing upon the part of the proper Of
fcers, was presented to the Govern
or. Upon these papers it became
the duty Of the governor under the
law to make requlsition on the gov
ernor of Colorado for the offending
parties. In due time this requisifion
was made, and the showing was
submitted to the governor of Colo
rado. The governor of Colorado
after thorough examination of the
papers, and after ADVICE by the legal
adviser of the state, honored the
requisition.
The showing made to the govern
or of Colorado is matter of record
and is IN strict and technical accord
with the provisions of the law rela-
tive to extradlting parties charged
with crime.
Governor Gooding did not assume
to act in any particular other than
as provided by law. and did not in
a single instance act outside of, or
contrary to the PLAIN provisions of
the law. There 10 not a provision
of the statute touching the matter
of extradition but was scrupulously
observed. He demanded the men
when the showing was made to him
as it was his sworn duty to do. The
showing being presented to the
governor of Colorado, he turned
over the parties to the representa-
tive of the state of Idaho, and in !
every particulahdue Observance was
had to all the provisions of the law.
It should not be forgotten that
the legality and regularity of these
proceedings have been reviewed by
our own supreme court. The court,
speaking through Chief Justice
Stockslager, approved of the pro-
ceedings. The matter was then
taken before Judge Beatty, and the
legality Of the proceedings were
again submitted and approved. Ger
tainly there can be but little ques-
ton about the strict Observance of
the law when thus reviewed and ap-
proved by the governor of Colorado
and his legal advisers, and the
supreme court and the federal court.
Those men may or may not be
guilty, that N for trial to deter
mine, but there can be no question
that it was the solemn duty of the
governor of this state upon the
showing made to bring these men
within the jurisdiction of the courts
in order that the question Of their
guilt or innocence might be deter
mined.
The showing disclosed that
murder had been committed, and the
governors duty was to act fearlessly
and efficiently. To have hesitated
or faltered would have dishonored
the state, and in the minds of all
right thinking men d,shonored its
chief executive. No one could have
acted more thoroughly within the
law and yet more courageously and
efficiently. 1t Is impossible to point
out single illegal act in connec-
tion with the extradition of these
parties. We are not discussing nor
is it our province to discuss whether
or not the men are guilty, and this
was something with which the gov
ernor had nothing to do. His duty
was one clearly pointed out by the
law, and all men must honor him
for having faithfully discharged his
duty under such circumstances.
"Moke Hay While the Sun Shines"
: There is lesson In the Work OF the
lns nulx ~