New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1865-04-01

We find in the Toronto papers which came to
hand yesterday, copious reports of the decision
of Mr.. Justice Smith in the case of the 81. Al
bans raiders pending at Montreal on an appica-
ton for their cxtradition under the Treaty be-
tween Great Britain and the United States.
Having read these reports with such patience as
we possess, we are inclined to admit that Mr..
Justice Courso has found a rival in Mr. Justice
Smith. When the points Of the decision of the
latter were stated the other day in 4 tclegraphic
dispatch, they seemed too absurd for even "A
Canadian Judge, but they did in fact state the
substance and scope of Mr.. Smiths argument
II is really true TINT this Canadian Manahsld
holds the Extradition Treaty between the United
States and Great Britain to have been abrogated
by decision of Judge Nelson in the Circuit
Court on n matter which did not in the rcmotest
way concern or relate to the Extradition Treaty.
We cannot convey a better notion of the mental
caliber and learning in the law which constitute
judicial qualifications in Canada than by pre-
scnting the point of Mr.. Justice Smith in his
own language as reported in The Toronto Leadcr
"A thoroughgoing Anglo-French- Canadan-Se-
ccsh organ:
THE treaty could not have been ratified II one
Nation ignored the principle which was based Had
the United States therefore, violated the contract en-
tered into In the treaty. lie cited the case Of the OIL
cen aud of the Savannah. before Judge Nelson
II was oontcnded. in defense. that they were commits
stoned "a priyaoers by the Confederate Government
which wss he tad0 Government. and that they were
carving out orders. Nelson held such defense be-
onged to the Legislative and executive departments.
and not the court lie refused 10 acknowledge the
defense. and the prisoners would not be allowed 10
plead the act Of their Government In their defense. He
he learned judge) maintained that this was violation
Of national law which destroyed the force Of the treaty
aud that the state of things had been changed to
render II impossible 10 carry ont the provisions Of the
treaty. The treaty therefore did not such
the one before him. The treaty having been violated
BY Of the contracting powers ceased 10 be- binding
npon the other For all the reasons advanced he be-
cycd that authority rested in him to grant tho ex
tradition OF the prisoners. and they were therefore
titled TO then discharge
The other ground on which Smith rests his
decision is that Gen. Dixs orderto shoot the St.
Adams robbers wherever found recognized them
As belligcrcnts," and the man seems to argue
seriously that these thieves and murdcrcrs be-
came thereby diycsted of their criminal char
acter and clad in the white raiment of "politi-
cal refugees and therefore were not included
in the Extradition Treaty.
But it is not worth while TO follow this Judge
further. Whether he is the accomplish of
his st. Adams proteges, or whether he is only
another Illustration Of British neutrality" we
neither know nor care. His decision amounts
to nothing. The scoundrels whom he sought to
discharge are still held by the Canadian Exccu.
tive aud there is some show of desire to enforce
the law against them aud put them in our hands
for trial. But we may as well remind the Cana
dian authorities that their Judicial farces are
growing tedious. COursOl and Smith are
enough. If they have colleagues and sympa-
thizcrs and emulators on the Canada bench,
the latter should be encouraged to hide their
blushng virtue behind vail of obscurty. We
don't want any more trials before Judges who
can be bribed to defy the painest provisions of
the treaty under which these men are de-
manded. If Canada means to execute that
treaty let her do it without any more nonsense.
If she does not mean to execute 1t, let her say
that, and We can then decide what measures
will be necessary to obtain indemnity for the
past and security for the future. t.