Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1840-01-11

!
ed my demand and promised TO 'pass upon the subject
within few days" Since that time, however although
one full month has elapsed, have received official
intelligence of the disposition you have made Of it =
As the demand founded upon the accusation of an
offence peculiarly and deeply affecting tie general
tcrcst of the good people Of this Commemorative
cognzed as felony and severely punished by laws
and as, if longer delay is permitted, the offenders may
escape altogether, trust you Will excuse my anxiety
for calling your attention to the subject and asking
that will dispose of with all convenient prompt
udc after the receipt Of this letter, and apPrse OF
The result
With sentiments Of high respect,
| am, Sir,
| Your Exceencys
Most obcdirnt servant,
Ii. J.. HOPKINS.
To his E5ccHenry ". H. SEWARD,
| Gorernor IF .Ts~ York, .NbaHy, .Ne~ York.
EXECUTIVE DErARrMESr,
Richmond October j. 1899.
Sr-Your letter Of the 10th ult, in answer to mine
of the 3Oth of August, has been received, by which
am Informed you have rejected my demand for the
render of Peter Johnson Edward Smith and Isaac Gan
sey, charged upon solemn affidavit OF having (about
the 18th Of July las ioniousy stolen and taken from
John G.. Collcy a.czcn OF Virginia, "a negro slave
named Isaac, the property of said Coliey beg you
10 he assured, Sir, that the views contained in yonr let
ter have been weighed most atcntlvey, anXousy, and
respectfully; ana but for their novelty and danger
Gus tendency, ! should have felt wish TO CONT
nue. the correspondence between farther. But
entertaining | do fixed opinion that your doc
trines At with the language and spirit OF
:. the Federal Observation-Disclosures with the true
/, relations, rights and duties of the States Of the
Cnicn, and calculated to disturb The general harmony
of the country, feel to be my mpcrous duty prompt
Iy TO protest against such precedent, and to vndlcatc
the rights Of the State whose executive functions have
been temporarily committed to my charge. Had You
placed your refusal make the surrender upon the
ground of the supposed defective affidavit upon which
the demand made, however widely might and
should have differed IN opinion with you upon that sub
cc, would have preferred, and should probably have
adopted the easier plan OF removing your difficulties by
having 1t put IN ccplionabc form But You have
rendered II unnecessary for pursue that course,
urge any arguments IN favor Of the scicncy of the
affidavit You close the door of ntormaty by declaring,
that '.admiR" Tie afd0rit 10 be SuiricRt firm amt
substance ehnrgc dctndants ach Ire II steai
negro stare from has master IN hr STATE Of H.,
dcfacd by The ia,os IF that State, ya in ing opinion he
oftncc IS not ruhia the meaning IF the Constitution Of
| Mc Iajtcd Si0tsS. You then proceed 10 define the
character of offences which III your opinion in
tended 10 be embraced by the Constitution in the
strcason, felony other crime; and for the perpetra-
ton OF which atone you seem to think il the right Of
executive to demand and the correlave obligation
of the other TO surrender, fugitive from Justice Your
| language is as follows:
81 believe the right to demand, and the reciprocal
obligation to surrender fugtives fm justice between
sovereign and ndcp endrnt nations, defined by the
law OF nations, include only those cases which the
constituting The offence charged rGcogni=cd
crimes bg the aaitorSdi Jar d all criscd conRt rcS
think il is also well understood, that the object Of the
constitutional provision III question, TO recognize
and establish this principle in the muua! relations Of
the States independents equal and sovereign commu
mites" You then conclude the consequence off
different doctrine, that "civ liberty would be very
| imperiecty secured III any country whose govern
mcnt was bound 10 surrender its citizens to be tried
and condemned in foreign jurisdiction, for acts not
| I;y,J I,y lnUss birba
several other portions of your letter. understand you
distinctly contend:ng that no State is bound TO
surrender one Of is citizens fugitive from JUS
tice, unless the offence which he is charged 10 have
committed in another STATE is recognized iclonous
criminal by the laws Of his State Now, Sir, these
doctrines are completely at with what ! under
stand to be the law of nations governing the intercourse
the rights and obligations Of separate and foreign
countries, and b. consequence yet more inconsistent
with friendly and Federal relations of these States,
as prescribed By constitution OF government fully
considered and freely adopted by each in its sovereign
capacity that cannot agree by remaining silent 10 be
considered acauicscing Tor moment IN their cor
RICHNESS According 10 the laws of nature and of
tons, every independent community of people has
undoubcd right to form for itself civil soccty-to
construct its own form Of government-to devise
and enact its system OF laws-to conduct its in
ternal municipal regulations in such manner as
NAV best conduce TO its happiness and pros
pcrty-and to establish by treaty otherwise all
such political relations and commercial arrangements
with other countries may not be IN conflict with
the universal principles Of justice and the rights of other
nations. 1t thus becomes free, independent and
sovereign State and It's proper station among
the great family of nations Neither the government or
the citizens of any other country can rightfully inter
fcre with its municipal relations in any way. cit Is an
evident consequence of the liberty and independence
of nations (says Nattcl,) that all have right TO be
governed as they think proper, and that state has
the smallest right to Interfere in the government of
another Of all the ri hts that can belong to nation,
sovereignty is doubtless the most precious, and that
which other nations ought the most scrupuousy TO re-
spect, if they would not do her an injury" The ct
zcns Of other country i'll anywise bound to put
foot upon her SOIL but if they choose Of their free
will do so, they become at entitled TO the pro-
tection and subject to the penalties of her laws; and
during their sojourn in duty bound to dcport them
selves as good and orderly members of the society to
which they have thus temporarily attached themselves
Should they choose to pursue different course, howe
ver by injuring the destroying or Purloinng
their property, and violating the laws, they then forfeit
their right of protection, and subject themselves to the
punishment affixed by the supreme authority to their
Offences.
According 10 Vatte page lG2: off the offended
State has in her power the individual who has done the
injury, she may without scruple bring him to justice
and punish him. II he has escaped md returned TO has
onn country she oug 10 apply TO his sovereign 10 hare
Justice dome in hc And since The latter ought not
to suffer his subjects 10 mo'cSf the subjects of either
States, 10 do them an injury, much less to give open,
audacious offence 10 foreign powers, ne ought " co-
pei the TO make reparaton for the damage
or injury if possible, to intct on him exemplary
punishment or finally, according to the nature and
circumstances of the case, to dclirer him up 10 the
offended State to be there brought 10 justice.
In strict accordance with these views, are those
expressed by very able and distinguished citizen Of
your State, James Kent, in the first volume of his
commentaries page SO. at has sometimes been made
question how far government was bound by
the law of nations and Independent Of treaty, to sur
render upon demand fugitives from justice, who
having committed crimes in country tee to ano
Their for shelter 1t is declared by the pubic luflss
that eperu state is bound 10 deny asylum to er'-
miuals and upon application and due examination OF
the case to surrender the fugitive to the foreign state
where the crime was committed Inc language OF
the authorities clear and explicit and the law and