◆ SpookStack

MEMORANDUM OF AUIHORTSIES UPON EATRADITICNH, nes v Tobin, 240 U,3.127, 60 Led 562: In the a ové case a person was extradited from one State to other, and after his release in the latter State, a demand for his tradition to the farmer State was made, to answer to anothor charge srein.s. He contested the requisition demand upon the ground that he 4a not leave the first State voluntarily, and therefore did not flee a justice; but the Cowt held him to be a fugitive from justice and congressional powers. I quote from paze 5684, 60 D644 06535 e6dt "vor the purpose of the solution of the ing under this heading, we treat the following propositions as beyond question: | (a)That prior to the adoption of the Constignion, fugitives from justice were surrendered Peonting n the Sta conformably te what were deemed to be the co princip of comity.(Ken~ tucky v.Dennison,24 How.66, 1, panitng eed 717 7273 2 Hoore, Extradition md Interstate 7, B20 ,et 204 )e Lass of the Constitution C to fully embrace, or rather | er authorit +2 poet with the subjects Prigzg ¥ Permsylvania, 16 fet.550, TUT .6d. 1065; “Kontucky -¥ pana’ Dehaisonys pray Taylor v Tainter 16 well $66 ,21 Le B&7z App eyard ssachusetta, < 03 us RZ, e) That the Ast 1793 (now tat.1913, see .10\12S5) was eo was deemed wise to do zo,and ing the aubject in far as that ay Operated, ded to be dominant, and, so far ae they Sperated, con ui Ting and oxolusive of State avthorkty. Jered him extradited. The case is important att of ite discussion (bv) That 1t was intended b vised Statutes ,sec.5278 Comp. ed for the purpose of camtroll-e o¢ 3 8 Sup,Ct 25645728) Lescelics veCoorgia, 3495 13 SupeCt.»RepeG87e ; »gre thus brought te the remaining heading which is: Second Blétiowwh the order for rendition waa not in ecm-~- flict ,cither oxrr esaly or by necessary implication,with any of the provisions of the "conatatutdon or atatute, was it neverthe- less vold under the clroumstances because it dealt with a aub- ject with which it was beyond the power of the State uto deal, and which was therefore brought,as the result af the adoption of the statute within exclusive Federal control,althcugh no provision dealing with suby subjeot is found in the statute? To appreciate this question,the proposition relied upon needs to be accurately atated.It is this: "The Conatitution provides for the rendition toa State of a person «ho shall have fled from juatice and be found in another States that is,for the surrender by tha State in which the fuci"ive ia fond.This, it is conceded,would cover the case and sustain the authority exercised ,as tho accused was a fugitive froa the Justice of Veorgla,and wes fomd in Texas.But