The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-08-31

we PRINT elsewhere COMMUNICATION
which contains valuable and interesting in
formation relating to extradition between
Great Britain and the United States under
the treaty of 1912, and why Lawrence, hav-
ing been demanded of England for forger-
les on twelve importations, was surren-
dered on only one importation. Discus
sions of that treaty are becoming OBJ
solete, because, as our correspondent truly
states, the extraditon article of that
treaty has become dead letter. But
if the meaning of that stipulation has
become an obsolete question the subject of
extradition has not being in fact question
of great interest and urgency between the
two governments. The present state of
things is hardly tolerable between two coun-
tries having such large facilities of inter-
course To say nothing of constant steam
communication across the Atlantic, the Brit
ish provinces, which stretch for several thou
sand miles on our northern frontier, sepa-
rated at Detroit, at Buffalo and at Ogdens-
burg only by rivers, and in many other
places only by mathematical line, present
facilities for the escape of criminals from
just punishment. Neither country has any
interest in protecting cutthroats and scoun-
drels who flee from the other, and corrupt
ing its own society by association with Grim
inals. Instead of sticking for the privilege
of harboring them it is for the common inter-
est of both to surrender them to justice 1t
is, therefore, to be hoped that the two gov
ernments will meet each other in a fair spirit
and speedily adopt some arrangement by
which the territories Of both will be relieved
of the presence of UNPUBLISHED criminals.
We think Secretary Fish has been entirely
right in his Interpretation of the dead
treaty, and are confirmed in this opinion by
q recent able discussion in the House of
Lords The Lord Chancellor made long
speech in support of the view Of the British
government, but he was followed by Lord
Selborne, a legal authority of equal emil
hence, who spoke in support of the Ameri-
can view and pretty effectually demolished
the Lord Chancellor's arguments. We will
not repeat the reasoning or the replies, be-
cause the Interpretation of the treaty of 1912
is dead question; but the fact that some of
the greatest lights of the legal profession in
England think that Mr.. Fish stood on ten
able ground is at least pretty conclusive
proof that the British government had not a
very clear case. An admission that the ques-
ton is even doubtful is quite enough to
justify Secretary Fish in resisting the novel
British demand that Winslow should not be
tried on any other charge than the particular
forgery on which he might be surrendered.
The necessity for refusing such o pledge
grows out Of the nature of our institutions.
Most of the criminals surrendered to us are
tried by different government from the one
which demands their surrender. We have
thirty-eight States, each of which has its
own criminal jurisprudence. with which the
federal government can interfere only in
exceptional cases. It is true, indeed, that
treaties made by the national government
bind all the State courts; but unless a
treaty is explicit and its Interpretation
clear one State court might take one
view of its meaning and other State courts
different view, and amid the multitude of
our tribunals and the diversity of their in
terpretations the whole subject would be
foresight and wisdom in declining to open
the door to such a state of things by refus-
ing to give a pledge as to how the State
courts would interpret treaty about whose
meaning the most eminent lawyers of Great
Britain differ.
But his views of the treaty of 1912 should
not in any way bind him in entering on new
now approach the subject as new question.
1t is no longer question of Interpretation,
but question of expediency. The old
treaty being dead, neither party has any
right under it, and an entirely new bargain
is to be made on the basis of fair exchange
of equivalents. Almost any extradition
treaty would be better than none, provided
it was so clearly and carefully worded as to
preclude differences of Interpretation by the
two contracting governments and among
the subordinate governments in this coun-
try and Canada that administer the criminal
laws There can be no difficulty between
the federal government and our State gov
ernments on such subject if the provisions
of the new treaty are free from ambiguity
because nothing is better established than
that national treaties are the supreme law Of
the land and bind oil the State tribunals
The Weather.
The haziness of the atmosphere yester-
day precedes rain, which will possibly
visit MS toward evening. The tempera-
ture will increase so that the afternoon
- A1.A