Pine Bluff daily graphic., 1914-12-22

i ti' dSS lufll, put luelC unlOfnllN were ! unsuccessful. Then came the escape from Matteawan.
 Escaped August 1913.
 On Sunday morning August 17th, 1918, Thaw slipped out of the rear gate of the asylum and was whirled out of the state in a motor car that had been waiting for him. He was not apprehended until he was safely in the province of Quebec. Canada. For a time it looked as if he would not be returned to the jurisdiction of the United States until extensive legal proceedings had been had in the courts of Canada William T. Jerome who had tried 1haw when he WAS OA trial in New York City for the mur der of Stanford White, was dispatch ed to Canada and Thaw himself re- tained the services of a squad of bar { risters and solicitors
 The Canadian proceedings were brought to halt when the Canadian officials washed their hands of Thaw by dep3siting him over the line in New Hampshire. He was taken into custody by the sheriff of Coos coun- ty, New Hampshire and then legal proceedings were instituted to pre- vent his being returned to New York. Hearings were held before Governor Falkner of New Hampshire, but the | Governor decided that the request f5" 1 eStraditon was valid and regular and | signed an order permitting the New 1 York state officers to take Thaw back l to their state.
 Then ThaW's attorneys appealed to the federal court of New Hampshire. Judge Aldrich was appealed to for 1 wrl of Habeas corpus and Thaw was permitted to remain in the custody or l tie sheriff of Coos county, in whose ', c,. .stody he still is.
 Judge Aldrich decided th't the K tradition proceedings wera inval'n. writing an elaborate opini ! in W ;e he reviewed exhaustively the legal merits of the extradition controversy The judge said that the questions raised in the proceedings in his court were new to both American and Ems fish jurisprudence inasmuch as Thaw was in reality a fugitive from de- cree of custody entered in New Yofk courts. The real question. ne held, was whether the process by which h,, was sought to be returned to New York was a due process of law.
 The question he further defined as a question of a person sought to be extnadited under the federal consti- tuition because he had fled from guardianship custody based upon the verdict of jury that he was insane, Judge Aldrich said there was great danger of the arbitrary use of extra dition in a case where mans sanity lraC to be proven in the courts of New York. He stated that the fed eral government has the power of seeing to it that the power of extra ditlon between the states is equally used, the source of the W lole power bemg in the federal govrnment.
 Grounds for Extradition.
 Oddly enough one of the preced- ents cited by the judge was ruling made by the late Governor David B. Hill of New York in which he took the ground that the extraditlon power should be carefully restricted and re- fused to eXtradite to New Jersey a man who was alleged to be melting the burning of buildings in that state although physically in New York.
 l In order to have extradition, the judge ruled, there must be three ele- ments a person, crime and flight. Such a person must be a responsible person and the flight must be one to avoid the consequences of crime committed. The extradition papers presented by the state of New York, the Judge ruled, showed on their face that the person whose extradition was l tsn O ,v1fix in, sane. His research showed no case either in this country or in England where it had been sought to employ tho eXtradition power to return a per- son whose flight was from a custody Of the character presented in the Tbaw case. The case differed from the Porter Charlton case, decided by the supreme court against Charlton in that no question of insanity figur. ed in the Charlton case. He entered no order permitting Thaw's freedom from custody because, as he said, it was we'll understood that an appeal was to be taken to the supreme court He put 1t up to the supreme court whether Thaw should be admitted to bail pending a final determination of the case and when appeal was made to that court to admit Thaw to bail | the request was denied.
 The state of New York took it's ap- peal to the supreme court on the ground that Judge Aldrich had erred ir sustaining the writ; substantially crime; in reading that the eXtradition process was not a due process of law ;.nd in holding that the warrant of l eXtraditiOn was invalid.
 | MANCHESTER MOCKNS.