Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/98

 ii :. UNITBDiiSTATiES W. BEAWNEBi �, {IMstrict Court, W. D. Tennessee. May 4, 1881.) �1. Obimnal Law— Ret. St. i: IOW-t-Bemoyai, of Peisqseb to Anotheb .^PjsjrEiCT— 'PpWERS op DisxKiCT ♦luDCfB— Haeeas OoRPoa �T}ie judge of the district fo wtiom application is Baade for a war- �raniof removal to another district for trial, may, ubder sectioil 1014 �; 'oi'the Revised Statutes, teview, without a writ Of habeas corpus; the �.1 aption of the committing magigtrat-e, and reduce the bail required byr �.jhirn, if it shall appear to be excessive. �2. ^AMB.J^UBJECT — Excessive Bah — Constitutional Law— Eiohtr ' AmNDMENT, Constitution o» tœe United ai-AtEB. �It af BUbstantially^ deniai of bail, and a violation of the constitu- �' Monol gu^r^ntjr agsinst excessive bail, to require a larger sum than,; �; Ifon) Itig ciTicymstancief, tjie, priscner can be reasonably expected to �give." A requiremjBnt of (6,000 in this case was excessive, and ther �' «im was rfedueed tt> »'2,5(K). �3. SAlIK'EhjBJECT — pROCBIinHK IN BaiIV— ApPEAKANCE IN ANOTaKB �DBatKiCT^^-JTi» IWhat Tebm ?— Tennessee Code, fi 6152, 6163, 615*, �. i The jprelltainar^ exaniimtion «of an alleged offender, arrested ivf �another district, must be according to the visages of law in the gtat^ �wiiei-e' the amist 18 made ;' and Where the Tennessee Code requires �that ball< l^t taben' in <Spen court' sbail be t6 the next term 6f the^ �court 'hafinfe/00gni7.anc|e,;thpdietrict judge' allowed the prisonento- �.^PjPpar at the,J5i,exi; teriQ.of the United Sta^^s district court for thc �eastern district df Missouri, and declined to cpmpel an immediate �Bppearanceto th«! eurrent terni. But i«œr« Whether, tinder special �, 'bircumstaoces^ this.might not be donK; notwithstandlng the require^ �■ iTjcpit,,thd)t,;the. prcceedings ahould be in accordance with ,the.,stat«: �statute., . r ;, ,■■■.., �Applicfttiou for a warrant of removal of the defendant te the eaisierii ditetrittt' of -iMiBeouri, for irial upon a charge bf counterfeiting. The record presented to the district jud^'e consists of the affi&ftvit ifpon-whifcli the-arrest was-made, the warrant of tVie commissioner for the arrest, and his commit- ment to the custody of the marshal to await the action of the district judge in the premisea. It appears by this record that the commissioner fixed the bail at $5,000, and in default of it the prisoner was committed as stated. The arrest was made on the first, and the commitment on the second, of the present month, in Weakley county, the prisoner waiving any examinatioii before the commissioner, -whereupon he was ��� �