15.
تا
.:
20. a bud to
4
CATO by the né na kolonapp of Svan
JON
Dad Jud .Iend #g0J-
ci pakethod Memoriitwa tu doni a to n0889% L
was,broosa # · J
can. ¿ ni bootes' tim da ¢ #Lecqa
1
Talist nok
* P:
21
oumat to
bce, noety denil pilistes BAT prok siening van od son knout
b
?
que li na ni ji vip #u
to poloviv B
#
13. A
**I
}
"
A
ni da
no abusooT:
น
لا
•
and end to
T
4 pia blvo a JRAVINTOVO,
10 20 10% olur ve besig#
▲ Bulu Rin to sonebivG BAG
A THIN *Ton Jon Ifir og to rof-
จ
Vyffod w
Vise, dini0 .2 .0
+
ero eine ni papa bej o Su Ilie I
mi doilyī do we vllowing duetile and nå brednɑo aw dalm
KE BU
www d due to orig
-nosi
TO TORTOVO one,1901
+
Junge One Tui acoustid to me there) to mogu tai
and Sw
B ON lie Iong-
68b a!
Lejupet pourai ris-
254
and return of Thite, both requisitions charging the crime of burglary. Both requisitions were honored; White was arrested on both warrants and before the magistrate the crime proved was grand larceny. "hereupon the writ of Habeas Corpus were procured, one from the State court and one from the U. S. District court and White was freed from arrest. There-
-upon new police court proceedings were begun in Wisconsin for grand larceny, a new warrant obtained on January 17th, a new requisition was issued by the Governor and White was again arrested in linnesota. A writ
of Habeas Corpus was sued out in the U. S. district court where after a
hearing the writ was discharged, whereupon White appealed to the U. S.
Circuit Court.
In rendering the opinion of the court, Justice Shiras saiu in part:
"The main ground upon which the release of the prisoner is
sought is that, by the proceedings had before Judge Kerr, and
the order therein made, the matter at bar has been fully and
finally adjudicated, and stands res adjudicata. It will be noticed that none of the proceedings wherein White was dis- -charged upon habeas corpus related to the complaint and warrant of arrest issued by the judge of the municipal court of Eau Claire city under date of January 17th. The contention
is that the several proceedings were in fact based upon the
one offence, and that the orders heretofore made, releasing him from the arrests made upon the prior proceedings, must be deemed to be adjudications upon the question whether White can be extradited for trial for that offence. Counsel have very fully and ably presented their views on these questions, and have cited any authorities thereon. I shall not attempt to quote therefrom, or to point out wherein differences exist in the facts of the different cases. It is entirely possible that the ples of res adiudicata might, under some circumstances, be available in a case wherein extradition was sought upon a second or third warrant issued for that purpose. Thus, if upon an arrest made upon a warrant granted by the governor, the question of identity of the person
!