Commonwealth ex rel. Sage v. Sage

Citations

• 160 Pa. 399
• 28 A. 863
• 1894 Pa. LEXIS 820

Syllabus

<p>Attachment — Extradition—Jurisdiction.</p> <p>The courts can in a proper ease surrender an alleged criminal to the •courts of a sister state for trial, but they cannot compel by an attachment a resident of Pennsylvania to go into another state and submit himself to the jurisdiction of its tribunals.</p> <p>Habeas corpus — Parent and child — Gomity.</p> <p>Considerations of comity do not require the courts of this state to dismiss the parties with directions to proceed to another state, in which the ■contract was made, or the parties were domiciled, so that the law of that state may be administered by its courts, but simply that our courts shall apply the same rule that the courts of the proper state apply.</p> <p>To a writ of habeas corpus issued by a father to secure the custody of a ■child, the respondent, the relatoras wife, filed an answer averring that the relator was not a fit person to have the custody of the child. It was not denied that both relator and respondent had been previously domiciled in New Jersey, and that the relator continued to reside there, and that, under ■the laws of New Jersey, he was'the natural guardian of the child. Held, that no considerations of comity justified the court in awarding the child to the relator, without inquiring as to his fitness to have tire custody of the child.</p>