J

بازی

TOL

me noge i

Q

.V

4

+

་ལྟ་ན།

QC

W 000 21 0 1.0

Odio IIA I...

:

of mulcas

TO URZ

XEFD 0.

V

i

L

5.

244

1

Loicuibeiwt juİVAL

@ 10 es e

1.

50

mite wind 9 av MI NI

;

2.30 ·

DA WIIKKA 170

i pesimi ako bud

+

"However inconvenient this may be to the authorities of the

British Government in the present instance, the inconvenienc- -es are obviously reciprocal and inevitable. The two Govern- -ments have by treaty agreed to make the question a judicial one; and they could not do otherwise; for the Government of the United Kingdom is a constitutional one, as well as that of the United States; and in both countries the writ of

nabeas corpus presents itself as the safeguard, in the hands of the judges, of individual freedom against all possible encroachments on the part of the executive.

X

I

X

X

*One thing only, it seems to me, can be done in behalf of the

British Government. Mr. Crampton may, undoubtedly, cause a

new complaint to be entered against Calder, and apply for a

new warrant of arrest, either with or without a new mandate

from the President. Celder has not been tried. He has been

examined by a magistrate, and the evidence is adjudged to be

insufficient to justify his extradition. But, upon a new complaint, he may be examined anew by the same or by an- -other agistrate, and the exhibition of additional evidence may lead to the conclusion of his criminality and the

certificate thereof to the President." - Vol. VI, Opinions

of the Attorneys General, pp. 96, 97.

One uller was wanted in Prussia for an extraditable crime but was discharged by the U. S. District Judge before whom the proceedings were begun, on the ground that the evidence of criminality was not properly authenticated; this ruling being contrary to a statute of which the judge was manifestly ignorant. The Prussian Minister complained and the Secretary of State asked the Attorney-General to call the judge's attention to the case with a view to obtaining an explanation. The Attorney General declined to do this on the ground that the Executive had no power to call on the Judicial branch for such an explanation,

but said:-

But

Share This Page