The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-03-19

denies the surrender of criminals except IN cases
of humanity but what such are, he fails TO
state.
That this subject has from very early period been
regarded as unprovided for by the jus gsntum, is
obvious from the various treaties, which contained
express stipulations upon the subject We may
mention the treaty between England and Scotland In
| il74; that between France and Savoy in 1878, and
between England and France in 1903. These and
similar treaties whilst they illustrate the general sense
of chIstendom to have been thus early on the mega
lire side Of The question under review show the
necessity of international law upon this point and
| also evince the tendency of those times towards
more harmonious intercourse between nations and
the propriey of assisting each other in the suppress
sion of crime That the doctrine Of surrender Is by
far the most salutary admits of question:; and Is
matter OF SURPRISE less than Of lament that two OF
the most moral and intellectual among the nations,
should have been among the last to exert themselves
in establishing this wholesome provision in the con-
ventional code of nations Ii then, we complain OF
England in regard TO this matter, we must equally
complain Of ourselves The law Of Belgium upon
this point is worthy of all praise for, without regard
10 treaty, she passed general law in 1888 authoriz
ing the surrender of fugitives from any country,
charged with crimes Of almost any sort, whether mala
in Sc, or mala prohibita-and made other quail
fcalion than that Of reciprocity of legislation. But
this wise and truly enlightened law has nevertheless
been found fault with by the morbid stckers for what
they call humanity preferring thereby the obsolete
and much misunderstood and greatly abused notion
of asylums and places Of refuge, than the far
salutary of hunting up crime and criminals and
i cich, 10 oc C,1o nd
of man. The Belgian law has been particularly and
roundIy censured by Ferreira, likewise by writer
in the Paris periodical, entitled Rspue Etrangere
de Legislation, &C., of December, 1888. We should
however, have previously mentioned the equally
mertorous example of the State of New York, which,
early April, 1922, provided for the surrender Of
uaitives in various CAGES, when demanded by foreign
nations. And that this subject for mere treaty
stipulation, and by provided for by the
law of nations to have been the clear Of
the people of this country from earliest existence
The confederated States once perceived the
sity Of some express stipulation the subject, and
fully provided therefor by its 4th article and in like
manner, the 4th article of the Constitution secures
this right. showing very clearly thereby that, even
among united as well as among confederated States,
the law of nations could scarcely be appealed to
sufficiently protective ofsuch right
In respect to foreign nations where there has been
no treaty stipulation, the American doctrine has
ephaticalIy denial of the right and duty of
render In truth is favorite doctrine upon which
we have heoriz well practised-nnd hence, pro-
badly has arisen the fact of the general silence of
treaties upon that subject. There il then
tient opinion of nations, Of law writers, enforcing
hc qrmcssss Of this queston; and wersjurists much
less divided it would still have 10 be remembered that
the law Of nations grows not out of the opinions of
publicsts-but out of facts and practices for OPT
mons, even when concurrent, but prima facie
Evidence Of the law, and the law itself The OPT
nion however divided one, the scale Of authority
greatly prepondera,ing in favor of negative espe-
cially abstract question. The simple fact,
however that nation has ever strenuousy asserted
it perfect right but that nations have generally
preferred to let repose upon convention shows con-
cusively that the decided 1oeight of auio-
ry favor of surrender still could not be- for that
reason, asserted against nation whose opnion up
the other side, and especially by nation whose
doctrine has ever been exactly the same But quite
sufficient and more, has been said upon this point
which would not have been pertinacious'y dwet
upon, had the writer not been aware that doctrine
though quite familiar to very many has been strange
ly misunderstood by very many others. And we
have been the more willing to dwell upon matter
very clear to lawyers because in nation like ours,
Gin which WAR the most intensity momentous of all ques-
tons, not only, made but carried on by seventeen
millions of people) the general mind should be in
formed, and only the studous few 1t is, indeed
true Of this nation and be predcaed Of no other
that war is made and fought by the people at large
In other countries is the government that declares
war, and few of their agents who fight the battles
In ours, on the contrary, public sentiment declares
war, and seventeen millions wage it! How impor-
ant them is it that the public sentiment should be COOL
dispassonae, and highly enlightened; and with this
humble and wel-intentioned view, and by no means
for the learned has the writer venured to state the
above views applicable the larger part of the case of
the Creole But there yet remains several other as
poets of this matter before the excited feelings of
may be made to subside, 50 that they may calmly
view it. without sectional feelings, on the one hand,
and without prejudice against England, on the other
prejudice extremely natural perhaps, and yet, if no
contradiction, extremely shocking
1t has been further urged by some, that although
the law OF nations, and even an established comfy
may not sustain claim to the surrender of these
offenders; and although the same result would have
attended the demand for surrender of freemen vet
that the innocent part Of the slaves only not
restored, but that in violation of oul fag-in viola
ton of our property, and in disregard of reposed
confidence, the British authorities at Nassau actipely
inteered and dispersed the slaves among their popu-
| lation; by which means they were prevented from
prosecuting their designed voyage. This is very
grave charge in part expanable-in part true and in
part incorrect No one can deny and none should
be disposed to question: the palpabe and gross want
of courtest, and the extremely manifest leaning of