, 1873-09-29
~-+-'- s
EKTRADITION TREATIES.


contains an unllsually interesting pupor upon tho
oxtradtion troatlos now in force botwoon Great
Britain and other powore. At present, Uroat
Britain hos troaticn with six powors,-tho Untod
States, franco, Denmark, Germany, Belgium,
aud Ita1y. Tho treaty with this country Ia tic
oldest OF tho etx, and includes hovon oironHos,
OIL sufficient proof Of which criminals may DO
arrested and sent back to tho country where
their crimes wore committed. Tho cntcgory is
as follows: /. Murder; 2. Assault with intont
to commit murder; 8. piraoy 4. Arson 8.
Robbery G. Forgery 7. Uttoranco Of forged
paper. Those Who havo committed any Of tho
above oironsos III tlis country, therefore,
cannot expect to find eafo asylum
IN England. Thoro is sho1ter, how
ever, for very large class in this country,
namely, fraudulent bankrupts and Hwinalora who
have obtained goods undor falao protonHos With
out actually committing the specific crimo Of
robbery. In the luck of any provision in tho
treaty concerning auch cascs, thoro is aomo do
greo Of consolation in tho fact that it works
mutually, and that wo have room for quite as
many Of this olass as Great britain, and that, IL
their presence in either country is undesirable.
Groat Britain las to tako the lions share of
them. Tho treaty between Trance and Great
Britain only covors four ofronsos, s,--murdor, at-
tempt to commit murder, forgery and fraudu-
lent bankruptcy. III 1869, troaty was
made with Denmark which covors nineteen
different crinlcs, and In 1872 ono waa also made
with Germany covering tho Same number Of
crimes. Tho treaties mado with Belgium and
Italy In tho samo yoar also infect the same crmcs
In fact, oil tito later troatios malo by uroat
Britain comprise oil aorious ofronsos, and warrant
tho oxtradttion Of criminals guilty Of any kind
Of fraud. or swintlling. or cmbozzomont Tho
Increase Of this class Of crimo within tue past
fow ycara In tho United statos is ono Of tho
strongest Of arguments for tho execution Of q
now troaty which shall cover such cascs. At
present, tho dofnultor, or e1nbczzlor, or frand-
ulont bankrupt has only to got out of tho colll-
try with his funla and ho at onco finds aafo rof-
ugo on English soil, provided tho oifonao can
not DO proved n direct robbery. Tho enforcement
Of cxtradition for thoao crimes would place
very effective check upon them. If tho DO
faultor know that Justice could follow him
wherover ho went with his stolen property, wo
should hear loss Of these crimes. Every conaid-
Grafton Of social morality and national interest
demands TINT criminals should be promptly
seized and delivered up, except, perhaps, for
petty misdomoauora or political offonsos, upon
which it is scarcely possible TINT any two coun-
trica will oyor como to MI agreement so long ns
forms Of government aud yiows Of political
questions differ al thoy do now. But groat
progress has boon made in international law
since tho timo when jurists contendod
that sovereign States were not bound to
dollvor up criminals, whethor subjects or
not. Your after year, public opinion haa
changed md grown moro liharalt and this
change is nowhere more clearly shown than In tho
treaties mado by Circuit Britain during the past
three yearB, which cover almost every serious
offenBo in tho calendar. Our own treaty llaa
been in existence for over thirty years without
any change or amendment, although tho ovonts
Of the past few years show that thoro is PRESS
ing need for broader and moro comprehensive
troaty. Thore is certainly no consistency in az
traditiug q criminal who has stolen property
by tho direct aud technical act of theft, and al
lowing the equally guilty criminal who hns
stolen property by tho roundabout way OF
dofalcation o. fraud to rost secure from oxtra-
dition With his ill-gotten gains. Tho extradition
treaty should be 80 amoudod nH to shut OF the
last avenue OF escape from this numerous and
rapidy-inoreasing class of criminals.