| OCR Text |
Show -169- The seotion of the act empowering the New York officials tx) remove from the state immigrants deemed liable to become chargeable upon the city "was no-b before the court in New York v# Miln. This decision was handed down in 1837* but three years later, in 181+0, there followed the case of Holmes v. JennisonA In this case the question to be decided was whether the state of Vermont could, without the consent of con- gress, recognize the extradition proceedings of the Dominion of Canada and ex- tradite thereunder a fugitive from Justices The court being equally divided* the writ of error was dismissed and thus the main question was not determined* Chief Justice Taney and Justices McLean, Story, and Wayne denied the power of the state to enter into any such relations with a foreign state as were in- volved in the extradition of a fugitive from justice, while Justices Thompson, Baldwin, Barbour, and Catron for various reasons favored dismissal of the bill* The reporter's note state's that the judges of the supreme court of Vermont were satisfied, on an examination of the opinions delivered by the justices of the Supreme Court, that by a majority of the Court it was held that the power claim- ed to deliver up George Holmes did not exist, and he was accordingly discharged* .Chief Justice Taney in his opinion reaffirmed the doctrine of the inherent right of self-proteotion announced in the case of New York v» Miln5 and held that the state, without the consent of congress, undoubtedly could remove any person guilty of or charged with crime, and might arrest and imprison him in order to effect this object. This, he held, was a part of the ordinary polioe powers of the state which were not surrendered to the general government• The state, if it thought proper, in order to deter offenders in other countries from coning within its borders, might make crimes elsewhere punishable also punishable in its oourts, if the guilty party should be found within its juris- diction* In all of these cases the state acts with a view to its own safety and is in no degree connected with the foreign government in whioh the crime was committed and the state does not co-operate with a foreign government nor hold any intercourse with it when it is merely executing its police regulations. He, however," held that in the case before him the situation was otherwise; -that in an extradition proceeding the state acts not with a view to help itself, but to assist another nation whioh asks its' aid; that the refugee from justice, Holmes, was not sought to be removed from the state of Vermont as a man so stained with crimes as to render him unworthy of the hospitality of the sta-te, but was delivered up to the Canadian authorities as an act of oomity to them* This Chief Justice Taney held was not the exercise of a police power, which operates only on the internal concerns of a state, and requires no intercourse with a foreign state in order to carry it into execution; it is the oomity of one nation to another, acting upon the laws of nations and determining for it- self how far it will assist a foreign nation in bringing to punishment those who have offended against its laws. Among other things, he saidj "The power to make treaties is given by the constitution in general tejrms, without any description of the objects intended to be embraced .by it; and, *'" *+Supra, note 1* -'Supra, note 2« • ^ , ¦' |
