The border vidette., 1912-03-16
NOT EXTRADITED.
Commissioner Bird Orders L. B. FIeischer Released From Custody.

tiOn case against l.. B. FleiScher,
 Commissioner Bird found that it
 was not a case where in there
 would be a conviction on such
 testimony as introduced in any and therefore Mir. FIeiScher was
 ordered dismissed from custody.
 The state of Arizona was represented by United States
 Attorney Morrison, and the de-
 fendant, l.. B. Fleischer, whom
 the Mexican government wanted extradited, was represented by Noon & Barry of this city ~
 The case was called Monday morning and at it's conclusion Tuesday morning, Commissioner Bird gave his decision after care fully reviewing the case.
 The Commissioners said: This case which has been brought before me has been very plainly shown by the papers and wit nesSeS and arguments of counsel on all points, and calls for the return to Mexico of the defen- dant for an OffenSe committed there, and in regard to which certain proofs have been submit ted which were taken before a court in Mexico and asking for the return of the accused who had escaped from the jurisdic- ton of that court.
 It is evident that in support of the papers submitted that the Mexican government rested to a certain extent upon the prOpoSi- tion that the accused was not citizen of the United States. It is true, that governments are less disposed to deliver up their own citizens to governments of foreign lands than they would the citizens of another nation, and they brought up the question of Mir. Fleischer's citizenship under the Act of 1907; and we disposed
 that the Act of 1907 provides
 that if naturalized citizen of
 the United States returns to the country from whence he came and remains there two years, that he loses his American citi- zenship, and if he goes to an; other country and remains five years he does the same. That,
 no doubt, applied to one natural ized under the laws 1907, but the evidence in this case shows that Mr. FleiScher was naturalizod in 1898, nine years before the enact ment of that law and is not sub ject to the same, and to try and prescribe it now would be un- constitutional, for in this case l the law of 1907 would be ex post facto and prohibited. so it is very evident to the mind of the Com missioner that Mir FleiScher has not q abandoned his citizenship by his residence in Mexico. and 1t was admitted by counsel for the United States that MT. Fleischer had continued his rights of Ame- rican citizenship when it was proposed ito offer the evidence of the Recorder of Santa Cruz County as to the Great Register and polling lists at various cleo tions; so Mir. Fleischer is to all | intents and purposes a full hedged citizen of the United | States.
 Now the testimony in relation | to his alleged commission of 1 crimes i'll Mexico goes to two ! One of smuggling 1 and one of bribery. It has been admitted that smuggling is not i extraditable, and while the en- tire evidence could not be sc | Parated between tile two charges, i the entire evidence as to bribery | rests upon the testimony of | three witnesses, one Manuel | Gonzalez, another Manuel All 1 varez, and another one DioniciO ! VerduRo, and there is another one, Enrique Gonzalez. but his testimony is not direct as to the bribery as he declares there was an arrangement made, but he does not testify how he knew there was an arrangements; his testimony is very weak. and the testimony of the other three is mostly relied on. As to two of them, we have here the letters written by those witnesses deS- how their testin ony was taken and denying it's truth There is also the testimony of i MT. Bowman. which went to show that the agent of the Mex ican Government who first took that testimony and then pre-