CO129-399 - Governor Sir May - 1913 [1-2] — Page 245

CAS

4.

243

t

OLT E NA RAQUIL

AC LOT? BUYS O

AJL

I

af Tan Mi

:

W.

abu :D DI LEOVAN

..

Di

BJ Moya Buytou 388...3: 40

and Ja Jun nà noivoier.00

(

#309 6 Ja Pi ayın veil ent

(10) „ent Y quasixil) .V TouÎNI

L T2

I Jo.

41 00 * IR

Ad do dun UN JĀTO S

LC

PROGNOMAS wytvo ste ut NO 9170sĺb A .QY Tunt durai,ve to donnay Injol Ii

i fav broe8 # 00 130 Hivi

De Dennis net Inn BiL Thaw plodovo si art bogumonih HİM „ÄOİVetę need bau ¡Jha fominqui Intuitur ne art o

J

-null to swNOÙ CLORUR 0. TO 13. 10

9000 290,silon era ini a

$%$ DIMUI. and nogi vinden alle hucon ode legatio-

4

# DENTING need

Cunt (198 kg (*. .008 990) :II .T IC So I uwe is in an.

1.19. 9okaut, briod 91 y guide,[igspoJ Wini ad

nuİLM, Oleandm.no ellt untie oors Jon bluco yand and blea

e17',suudeta Suď to nuk: 089

A

, Bror I9q

HRV TIQ 00 97 u ou ames noijous Alj tu dunçük İngim inq

,cuq100 m330am to edir?s no qu đu poĩ Thou 3.

LVO 119.3 odnİ Wİms us liau yaivių, no bogumaib bra

jaio.

joomile a pin. 8, J TOL

. B 700 * ado. To ading ›hopen a Juo BNG W SUIINU TER

Joy quail conroq u. 3 dub - muialvung Bad an AT:B, 3:5

TDOD OIL TO I: 10

J'000 TM JO 10 * 180. 3 ug no mi joten tu huca n. Ila a

to noi, odenisi „ grivin

i

having jurisdiction of the cause', were probably added to meet the case of an indictment having been moved by certiorari from one court to another. They (their lordships) do not say, however, that the section may not also ap ly to cases where a prisoner is discharged unconditionally upon the ground that the warrant, on which he is detained, shows no valid cause for his detention. They think, however, it can only apply when the second arrest is substantially for the

same cause as the first, so that the return to the second

writ of nabeas corpus raises for the opinion of the court the

same question with reference to the validity of the ground of detention as the first': Attorney-General, etc. v. Kwok-a-

-Sing, 5 P.C. 179, 201. As to the authority of this case that an ap eal lies from a judgment of discharge on habeas corpus,

see com ents of Lord Halsbury, L.C., in Cox v. Hakes, 15 App.

Cas. 506, 520.*

This is especially interesting from the view taken of the

effect of the decision in the Kwok-a-Sing case; a view shared

by British jurist as I shall show later.

UNITED STATES AUTORULYS GENERAL.

The view of the administrative officers of the United States Government is shown by opinions of the Attorneys General. I will cite

two.

In 1853 one Calder was arrested in New York for extradition to England. Judge Edmunds found that there was insufficient evidence of criminality and so reported to the President. A motion was then made to remand the prisoner until supplementary evidence could be obtained which the court decided it was without power to do, it being a matter for the Executive. The British Minister thereupon applied for the prison- -er's retention and the Attorney-General, Hon. Calab Cushing, concededl; one of America's foremost jurist, August 31, 1db3, ruled against this

procedure saying:-

However

i

!