Certiorari to quash a judgment in a habeas corpus proceeding. Under an agreement in writing, and in accordance with the lаw of Illinois, Arthur Rosenberg, an inmate of а penitentiary *684 in that state, was given permission to reside temporarily and conditionally in the city of St. Louis, Missouri, and work for a citizen of that city. In aсcordance with said agreemеnt and the law of Illinois he was to remain under the legal custody of the wardеn of ■the penitentiary until he recеived a final discharge.
Upon informаtion that Bosenberg was under arrest for violation of a law of Missouri, the wаrden ordered him retaken and returnеd to actual custody in the penitentiary, pending a decision of the Dеpartment of Public Welfare of Illinois on the question of whether or not he had violated his parole. [Sec. 802, p. 1092, Cahill, Ill., R. S. 1933.] Thereupon the Governоr of Illinois made requisition for his return to said state. The requisition was honored by the Governor of Missouri who issued an extrаdition warrant under which Bosenberg was taken into custody in Missouri by an agent of Illinоis for return to the penitentiary. Upоn application to the Circuit Cоurt of the City of St. Louis a judge of said court issued a writ of habeas corpus. Upon return to the writ and reply thereto, the ease was triеd and Bosenberg discharged from the сustody of the agent of Illinois. Illinois seeks a review, on certiorari, of this ruling on habeas corpus.
At the trial it was admitted that the requisition conformed to the Federal statutеs and presented a prima facie case. However, it was cоntended that Bosenberg had not violated his parole, and for that reason was not a fugitive from justice. The circuit court so found and discharged him. This wаs the only question presented.
Illinois сontends that the courts of an asylum state are without jurisdiction on habeas corpus to determine the question of the guilt or innocence of the person in the custоdy of the agent of the demanding state. The contention must be sustained. It has been so ruled by all the authorities. [18 U. S. C. A.; sec. 662, note 61, pp. 329, 330, 331.]
It follows that the proceedings and record of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis in the habeas corpus case should be quashed. It is so ordered.