Evening star., 1933-05-12

Public opinion is against the ruling
CT Judge James A. Lowell Of the Federal
Court in Massachusetts,, who refused
extradition of a colored prisoner ac-
cused of murder in Virginia. The
Governor of Massachusetts had ordered
the transfer of the prisoner to the Old
Dominion. but the court dissented. In
the course Of the resulting debate,
violation of the Federal Constitution by
the Judge has been charged. and there
is criticism of his assumptions regard
ing the probable course of justice in
white jury, with the further statement
as to the attitude of the United States
Supreme Court.
The Massachusetts judge is guilty OF
a serious invasion of States rights"
thinks the Richmond Times-Dispatch.
while the Lowell Evening Leader feels
that there is an impression that the
Judge made an error of judgment or law"
the question, being in the opinion of that
paper, 'one of jurisdiction The At
lanta Constitution holds that the de-
cision was "an inexcusable indictment
of the people and the courts of a
sovereign State which has contributed
more literally than any other Common
WcdlCIl W lllC luSllCoI tldulIlOllC VI tAAC
Nation"
IF extradition is to become matter
of personal Judgment of officials re-
garding the laws of another State, the
process would cease to have any con-
stitutional protection" in the opinion
of the Hartford Times, which also Of
fers the verdict: This judge has made
q novel decision which will be regarded
with indignation throughout the South
ern States and which may meet with no
little disappointment in the North.
Precisely what right Massachusetts, has
to sit in arbitrary judgment over the
courts and the administration of justice
in another State may be questioned.
What applies to the artificia! person;
Massachusetts, applies to q Federal
Judge sitting in Massachusetts,.
IF Judge Lowell is wrong in his law,
the higher courts will probably reverse
his decision" AYERS the Springfield
(Mass) Republican, pointing out that
the extradition of George Crawford was
granted by Gov. Ely in response to the
request of the Governor of Virginia
and recalling: Governors sometimes
refuse extradition requests. President
Roosevelt did, when he was Governor
of New York, in the case Of some New
Bedford strike rioters when Gov. Allen
sought to have them sent back to Mas
sachusetts for trial"
Judge Lowell seems to have taken
it upon himself to write the opinion Of
the Court Of Appeals before the initial
trial" charges the Roanoke World
News. emphasizing the point that III
there Is any substance in the supposi-
tion that the accused would not have
fair trial, he has his recourse both
to the State Supreme Court and to
the United States Supreme Court"
That paper also states: Both Massa-
chusetts and Virginia are appealing
from this remarkable decision, which
Is in direct conflict with that section
of the Federal Constitution which says
that a person charged in any State
with treason. felony or other crime,
who shall flee from justice and be
found In another State, shall on de-
mand Of the executive authority Of the
State from which he fied be delivered
up. to be removed to the State having
Jurisdiction of the crime"
"Validation Of Judge Lowells ruling
would introduce into extradition pro-
cedure complications that would gravely
interfere with administration OF justice" I"
AYERS the Baltimore Sun. and the Nor
folk Virginian-Pilot protests against his
assumption as to legal proceedings in
the Virginia courts and In the United
States Supreme Court. The paper
concludes: THE Virginian-Pilot makes
no pretense to knowing whether this
particular prisoner Is innocent or guilty
and is not greatly concerned with what
the jury finds. provided he has a fair
trial 1t Is concerned however, with
the attempt to vitiate the rightful
judicial processes because of q shadowy
fear Of what may happen, the more es-
pecially since Virginia justice justifies
no such fear. Both from the record of
many years and from present alertness
to individual righ1, there Is every rea-
-. f0x &hinl ~ c1nNfon1 no6lld ~