Pettit v. Walshe, 194 U.S. 205 (1904)
U.S. Supreme CourtPettit v. Walshe, 194 U.S. 205 (1904)
Pettit v. Walshe
Argued April 6, 1964
Decided May 2, 1904
194 U.S. 205
Where the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, and the warrant under which the accused is arrested both refer to a treaty and the determination of the court below depends at least in part on the meaning of certain provisions of that treaty, the construction of the treaty is drawn in question, and this Court has jurisdiction of a direct appeal from the Circuit Court, even though it is also necessary to construe the acts of Congress passed to carry the treaty provisions into effect.
Where an extradition treaty provides that the surrender shall only be made
"upon such evidence of criminality as, according to the laws of the place where the fugitive or person so charged shall be found, would justify his apprehension and commitment for trial if the crime or offense had there been committed,"
one whose surrender is demanded from this government and who is arrested in one of the states cannot be delivered up except upon such evidence of criminality as under the laws of that state would justify his apprehension and commitment for trial if the crime had there been committed.
A United States commissioner appointed to execute the extradition laws has no power to issue a warrant on a requisition made under existing treaties with Great Britain, under which a marshal of a district in another state can arrest the accused and deliver him in another state before the commissioner issuing the warrant, without a previous examination being had before some judge or magistrate authorized by the acts of Congress to act in extradition matters, and sitting in the state where he is found and arrested.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.