The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-05-20

would seem Ass the ssunssl for ths two govern
.s.ts sbrsd under nis,p prshsnsiea = 70 ne a,n =.
meaning, and he had doubt that The Oommhsnnsr
woad deem his constr ucton The correct one womb DC
used. 10 what were those crimes 10 correspondY N
geometry, which exact sc ence used 70 be proved
una; two ngurss so,rsspndea-nns, we're Ts vas
an illustration Of what v ~ meant In the treaty Dy we
words corresponding crimes" The crimes In the Frenn
law for which criminals 70 be surrendered werc 20
ond exactly with the crimes Of burglary and roor
beIy in the American law They were to be ne,ther
greater less And when II proved that he offence
charged against these accused 70 the slime
Of burglary robbery In American law he woadoe whY
to have them ssrrendered but not I'LL then ne wound
look now the French side Of the treaty He had got
correct translation Of II, from which tho Commissioner
would that the French translation Of the American
side Of the treaty correspondent exactly with the de AM
ton which he had given It. He assumed this 70 BIO
truth that the French Legislature knew better than the
prosecution here the exact meaning 70 BIO given 70 the
words voI q1ahte crime. The French translation OF 'he
section OF the treaty was -,
Of robbery consisting Of the orcioe and cmi
az aS BY hs Id Of
ons in 81 nh By z, or shins s
ing Of snSher With I'm and s s
under the qualification Of robberes nied with violence
The French codiGers legislators (Mr Gabraith con
tnued had given the precise meaning 10 the treaty when
he (Mr G. insisted the true one And the fact OF
the counsel Of the prosecution urging the contrary was
argument that tho French legislators uu
not understand their language or their own laws
He did not advance this proposition for the purpose
allowing two criminals to escape. II he thought
his construction OF the treaty false one, he would not
urge it, but he felt that other construction would
could be acted on by this government or
ment. Otherwise thers would be one CONSTRUCTION Of
the treaty side and de rent construction Of 1t on
the other sde and To the course TO be adopted IN sucn
of things he would refer TO the OF the United
States against Percheman, repored in Peters Reports
page 6S-a which the con truction 10 be
given 10 the treaty made with Spain, where inc Judge
says:-
The English and Spanish @ the treaty. can Without
his Conformity ought 70 prevail.
He asked that the rule would be followed In this
case, If there any discrepancy between the English
and French versions the treaty but he held there was
such dis crepancy. The French had interpreted the
wordsl vol qadhte crime as crimes corresponding our
he claimed 10 be the meanings and in confederation OF that
he gave, not merely his own, but the translation OF
person thoroughly acqu lned with the French language
There In the French c do equivalent to the
English terms Of burglary and robbery The French code
did not define crimes merely classified them by the
punishment Therefore, burglary and robbery were
translated by the phrase the corresponding crimes
known to the French law by the name OF u1l, with the
Guilty making both versions Of the treaty consistent with
each other; they both uniform. But even II they
were not the Of Peters, which he had cod showed
that where there diversity the treaty must BIO so con-
srued to make both sides unite This, he contended
consistent with reason, otherwise what would the
consequences beY treaty simply contract between
natons-a mere bargain, an every day lsinees o,cur
renee, and it required unity or opinion and an
wise was no confae. or bargain at ali If, there.
fore, the prosecution commended that there was q
difference of meaning between the two sides OF
the treaty, and that that diversity could not be recon
cled he asked to be- then there no treaty at all
in force became void and the prisoners must 30 free
crime with which these parties we're charged He oon'
tended that the prosecution was bound To make their
ssre 81 %
charge must be SO definite and certain Is 70 enable the
prisoner to know with what he charged and TO let the
Court know what Is TO upon He could not soc that
in this case there any definite charge made but he
anticipated that counsel for the prosecution would
deavor TO construe the phrase 10, qals crime a. hay
Ing indefinite, vague meaning so - to make II take
In every crime and all Crimes and no crime al ALL just as
they felt disposed II the charge was burglary, or II II
prepared to meet H. but no could BOT he m
meet d the sonSr Gould not place any
This difficulty might probably have arisen from the hasty
manner in which the preliminary proceedings had been
got up in France. On reference Snfords european
Criminal Codes" he legal part OF which he understood
was superintended by very eminent lawyer, an ex
Governor Of OF the Saes he found the order OF pre-
minary criminal proceedings In France hsdemeano r'
pro- ecued there by ProcurTs Gendlz and Poctt
T Ts d han IA d S sh dor nens or
las . Ju9e dInshrsctton, or examining magistrate
Ju9e dInsypo,on Is assisted in his functions BY
the Procwel1 de la Repuie, he undertake no ac
Of instruction prosecution without having oommuni-
Gated the 70 that runctonAry After taking the
preliminary examination he sends all the papers In the Case
to the Procne~ de Ia Repi who makes the necessary
motion In Of faora ae, or where the criminal Is
taken In the The PTocre1 de Ia Repubti2N yuge d
Inyio can act alone The Juee Irucson Is obliged,
ut least week, 10 make report " the Chdnre d.,
Css OF the cases which have before him after the
papers relative thereto have been communicated 70 the
ProcuaT de Ia ReptiQue for his conclusion. This Cham
b~e de Cosei decides how far the facts, which from
subject OF the preliminary examination, are proved or
are probable and whether they constitute crime, mis-
conTavenon. He con ended that these re-
case that therefore, the proceedings void for
he referred 70 the Instructions given IN this case
10 show how necessary this compliance with forms was
deemed "spccify carefully tho crirno OF msdeneanor
OF which they are accused"
Mr.. korrough raised question IN reference 10 the
Frenc h word rendered into "msdemeanor."
Mr.. Gabraith Was surprised that Mr.. Morrough would
repudats his translation. Tia SO instructions showed
that the JuN dIstrson was In doubt 81 TO what Was
tho crime whether II q crime or msdomcsnor. But
whatever the crime was no contendod that under the
n ench code the ChanJre de Cnstt was bound 70 pass
upon before these prisoners could be extrated The
principal psr Of this case had turned upon u
Baron Rothschld, which were aedg 70 be missing from
Of the safes and the great controversy was whether
these shares had been distracted pfered whether
IL breach OF confidence on the part OF those
who had charge Of them 1t appeared very doubtful 70
him hr. g. whether these shares were ever In inc saie
Al any time aer 1852 lie had examined all the evidence
and could not find anything 70 sahfy his mind ua' hcy
The understand your POSITION then 10
be that there Is positive evidence In the case 70 show
thai these shares were deposited In the arrrnre
Mr. Galbrah-Ycs, cannot ind any evidence that they
were there II Is true that OF tho administrators, in
vague way, when be "a swearing all round-amost 10 the
same way that Iesssndier sworo 70 ,he ~ u
case u true, say that this administrator the Marquis
Deon decor Of the Legion OF Honor, makes some state
meni about IL; but my mind Is not satisfied that these
shares In the safe at ALL II they were, they
were never after 1852 Counsel commenced upon the
loose general way OF drawing differences from uncoa-
nected facts that 10 be remarked In this case
IL charged In the warrant OF arrest that the act was
done the night time. How that sought 10 be poyedi
One proof was that Guern, the night waichman, had
been purchased By 900 shares and another that there
were many persons passing into and out OF the office in
the dag time toa was impossible for 70 DO done ~
any other time than night 30, In the same way, vas
sought have the inference drawn that The robbery was
effected by false keys from the fact that number Oh
kcys-uone Of them lifting the safe-were found In Gre
let's de~k Counsel showed the absurdiy OF such deduc
tens lie should have supposed, too, that n reference 70
the question whether these shares had ever been In the
safe that the testimony OF Rothschid himself would have
been the only competent evidence on that point unless
somebody had seen him deposit them. kouscnIu
was sent TO the United Sates, and there wa,
therefore NO resson vhy bls depositons not