The Rutland weekly globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1876-09-29

out TO see that she surrenders an ALLEGED
criminal only on proper proof. But, after
all, is it not our concern TO see to il that
we do not make ourselves a party to the
forcible abduction of an innocent man
for If it should prove that the extradiled
person is not William NJ. Tweed, then an
innocent man has been arrested in Spain
and forcibly brought to this country.
Think of it moment. A man by the
name of William NJ. Tweed has been guilty
of-murder, it you please. He escapes
from this county, aud is in parts unknown.
He has bcen somewhat prominent in Amer
ican politics--so much so as TO have formed
one of the subjects for Nast's pencil. A
hue and cry IS raised, and..a man has tcen
found travcling.in Spain with a real or
fancied resemblance to one of these car
toons, and forthwith be is assumed to be
the man sought for, and. without any
proof as to his identity. without any evil
dence that he has committed a crime
without, even, stopping to inquire whether
he has been indicted or not, he is surren-
dered, placed,on an United States vessel,
and, against his will, brought to this coun-
try. What is this but Kidnapping? Sup
posing, aud it seems to- be matter of
doubt, the man is not Tweed, what thenH
Is it not an abduction all the same, in that
he is arrested, transferred to a United
States vessel, a1d forciby brought to this
country, not only against his will, but in
the absence of all law-eXcept the law OF
force-authorizing it ?
We need not stop to inquire why the
general government has been so exceeding
ly anxious to secure the arrest Of Tweed,
when il allows his partners in Guilt-Con-
molly, Sweeney, Genet, Fields, et dl-to
quietly remain abroad, in countries, too,
with which we have extraction treaties;
and when it made no attempt to secure the
return 20 this country of Sharkey, a con-
victed and condemned murderer No one
would regret to see Tweed brought to JUS
tice for his misdeeds, aud compelled to
disgorge his ill-gotten gains, but there is
something to be considered besides Tweed
and his crimes
Is this to be taken a4 a precedent for
not undertake to secure an alleged crimi-
nal from Great Britain in like circumstan
ces-we had an exlradition treaty with.
that country, and yet failed to obtain
Winslow. Is Tweed's crime greater than
Winslow's, except in the amount of plum
der? This is not the difference. TIE diff
ference is, Great Britain is powerful ma
tion and our equal in every respect, while
Spain is weak and our inferior We pre-
sumo on our superiority and SPANS inferi-
crity-ard Spain no more dared refuse our
the Virginlus case-she yielded to the su-
perior power of fear in both cases.
Can this country reciprocate, should
Spain make similar demand5 If 50,
what's the use of extradition treatiesa But
everyone knows that no administration
was, or ever will be, strong enough to sur
render an alleged criminal without proof
that a crime has been committed and show
ing the identity of the criminal with the
person whose arrest is sought-eyen if it
would dare do it without the obligations of
an extradition treaty. This country has no
right to ask of another country to do thst
which we would be unable or unwilling to
do under similar circumstances-and this
makes the course of the United States in
reference to the arrest and return of Will
liam NJ. Tweed If it shall prove to be him,
one of more than doubtful expediency.