The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1842-03-15

Fan Debate ON the Creole Case in the nouse
OF Lords, Feb 18th
Lord BRt uoHAn said he had now to bring under
the notice OF thti ordships the motion OF which he
had given notice on former eyeningfor the produc-
ten Of any correspondence which might have taken
place between his noble friend Che Earl OF Aber
d-eD) opposite: and the American governn,enIss to
he ship Creole Whether any such correspon-
dence existed he knew not; but ifthere did, be was
not aware thai any objection could be made 10 It's
production. Ii, however, his noble friend had any
objection TO the production Of the pa ers at pre-
seut he would not press his motion. Ia bringing
this subject under The consideration Of their lord
ships, he would state that since he had mentioned
the subject the FIRST night Of the sessOn, he had
again considered it in ali its bearings, and after
having examined all the authorities respecting II,
not in the exp citation that he should find any thing
tha. could alter the opinion he had given on the
first evening, but 10 see whether ANY thing IN the
shape Of doubt could present itssif, E0ihiny OF
the kind had occurred to him. On The contrary,
the more he had considered it the more confirmed
he felix in his Opinion, a. to the right OF one nation
tn d, mand Of another subject " no had taken re-
f.ge IN it having committed or being charged with
or even convicted Of an ecpce, in the nation claim
ing him In considering this right, even supposing
it to exist BIZ tresty between two countries, yet
there would still ano,h>r question ariss, namely,
whethtr the municipal law OF either country was
amcd wi,h power to carry the treaty into execu-
ton; for unless such power were given by the mu.
picipal law, the treaty would be useless and IL no
effect IL was clear, then, that one saton could
not in fairness demand OF aGother to deliver up one
of its subjects who had taken refuge in that nation
even, as he had said, when that subject was char
gsd with the commission Of . crime in his own
country. Suppose, then, treaty to have been
signed between England and America. the Object
of hch was an admission Of the wight oil each
to demand tho sure nder OF any Of lis subjects
who might have taken refuge with The her,
though he NO. aware that any such existed, but
suppose ii had been ag,sed to, and TO be bind.
isg reciproca!ly on both, il oald still be u-eless
and imperative until the municipal law armed the
executive with the power OF carrying Il intotnsc
He though, that a sufficient distinction. had teen
maze between the tw cases the question OF trea'
", and hat Of the municipal law. IT. then, no su:h
uuncipai law AZ he had rc!t rred TO existed here,
the government of this country had no pow,rtO
surrender up any person who bad taken refuge in
il, whether n subject, for that made no dihe-
renee wha ever as 10 the principle. lie might re-
Ter to the treaties between this coasfry aud Anne
RIGA Of 1898 and of 1872 Those might have BEEN
very proper treaties, but 1t was impossible they
could have been acted ON until tho law gave the
power to carry them int effect. The only doubt
that had arisen in his mind with respect TO the
case of the Creole was the allegation npado, that
a case Of piracy had been committed That eel
tainly would make serious difference in the CAGE
The case Of piracy stood in two respects
in very different position from any other whore
the charge was against an alien to this county
for crimes alleged 10 have bsea committed in his
swn For though in any such case this ecsntry
would have NO power to seize, or detsn, or give
him up, yet in the ease Of piracy Il had such
power, and would be fully warranted in its exer-
else. II had even the power TO try and punish the
crime Of piracy, Though committed ~ an aiis: In
escaping without punishment; but In case OF any
other crime (evsn nurder) committed in foreign
country, we had ne power to seize or detain the
party seeking sheiterhere' or even 20 deliver MN
up. When he stated what was CUR municipal law
ia this respect, a. between this couAtry and Ame-
riea, he was far from thinking that it was state
Of law which Dug hit 10 be allowed 10 continue The
rights Of justice, OF social intercourse and good
neighborbood required his opinion, that between
esuatries bordering one ON another, such as merica
and England with reference to her colonies, and in
Europe, France and England and Holland and Bel
gism, there ought to be laws on each SIDE recipro
ca,ly giving to the other power 10 demand and Sc.
care gross offenders who had committed crimes in
the one country and hcd for sAelter into the other
He csuld hard imagine how the anicable inter-
coarse between two bordering and friendly nations
could be maintain d without each armng the other
with suek power. That such municipal law ought
tn exist between neghboripg and friendly states
enc would deny who wished to see their friendly in-
tereourse permanent; but that no such power exist
ed by the municipal law Of this country no lawyer
who had considere the subject could for mt
entertain any doubt TWAS said that about ~ years
age municipal law was passed in the State Of New
YORK by which il had right to claim from the ad.
mad been convicted Of felony, or against whom bill
for felony had been found, and who sought refuge
there. and that reciprocal right was given TO Cana
da nier similar circumstances A similar law lad
been passed in Belgium with respect to France, but
it could operate only in cases where certain proceed
ings had already taken place with Iespectto the
patty claimed, and where the claim was made
within fixed time. was, ne rspeated' most DO
all bordering states but unless in cases where such
laws were 10 force, no nation had right to claim
its subject from another. Having stated these
grounds Of hi, opinion as to our want OF such pow
ships, but would submit his motion.
The Earl of Abardeen begged to state. in answer
10 the question of his noble and earne friend that
communications had taken place between her Ma
jesty's Government and the Governor Of the Ba-
hamss on the subject TO which his motion rcferred
and perhaps his noble and learned friend would not
press his motion at the present stage Of the trans
action, when he informed the house what had been
the course pursued by the Government on the SUBJ
ject. As their lordships might well imagine, the
ent had given to the ease its most serious
consideration, and had avaied Itselfof all the legal
assistance which was desirable respecting il, and
they came to the conclusion, that BY the laws OF
this country there was no machinery or authority
for br,neing those persons to trial for mutiny or
murder, and still less for delivering them up. Ac
cordingly orders were sent out BY the Secretary
fer the Colonies for releasing those persons who
had hitherto been detained. 1t was possible that
there might exist some law in part OF our North
American Colonies by which those parties might
be brought to trial it could be acted on, but
he must say that he not aware Of the existence
of any such; and If il did not exist, orders had
been sent TO discharge the men. 3. farls3
Lord Dcnman said, that as bis noble and learned
friend had put of this motion from Friday in conse-
suencs OF kis absence, he felt called upon TO Offer
few words on it. He. believed he might say that
all Wesiminste r-hal including the Judicial bench,
were ofthe same opinion n that now expressed by
the earl of Aberdeen, and ef his noble and learned
friend near him, that there was nothing in the
law Of England which would authorize the Govern
ment 10 giving up persons who had been charged
with crime in foreign state, and sought refsge
ment, the same opinion had been held BY men Of
different political opinions on other points.
Amongst these there was one 80 strongly express
ed by SIR G. Wctherell that he could pet avoid
reading il to their lordships -" II alieAs were
sent oat of this country because they were un-
popular At foreign courts, the powers Of the act
were abused. That they should be accused Of
offences in foreign counui les reason for refu.