The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-09-25
i.O28.O78


Have Onlyto Touch that Little UeIi,
As Mr. SEWARD bud his little bell. so Mr.
FISH has his. without any treaty stimuli
ton with Spain providing for the mutunl
rxtudition of fugitives from Justice. Mr..
Fiu signifies 10 the Government of sp lin
that the Government of the United states
wants one TWEED: aud forthwith,
without any public inquiry into any rea-
son for the demand, the Spanish Govern
mcnt arrests one TWEED, and hands INN
over to the Government of the United
States.
Ii Is of no sort of consequence that the
mars name IS WILLIAM VI. TWEED, or what
l. TO be done with him, or why he is wanted.
His name might 1be any other name; the
reason Tor demanding MIN might b, any
reason on which the United States might
choose TO act. In the absence of any treaty
of extraditiou, the Government demand
ing the surrender of an individual has
nothing to govern its action but it's own
arbitrary will.
The frst serious objection to such pro-
ccedug is that II is contrary to the settled
aud Evolutionary policy 'of the United
states. Over and over again IL has been
declared by our Government that we do
not recognize the principle OF extriditions
by comfy that we neither demand nor
receive the extradtion of individuals ex-
cepting by treaty stipulation. 1t has been
the declared policy OF our Government
from the first, that this matter of extrad-
ton shall be regulated i'm such manner
~ 70 v..lt, "a. III.
ulated discretion aud arbitrary VIII Of the
Government from which n surrender is to
be obtained. Our policy III this respect
lis been founded on the necessity aud
prppriety of neither asking nor being
asked to seize individuals and to transport
an ! deliver them in custody to the Gov
erhncnt seeking to Dossess itself OF their
persons, excepting for assigned causes, 10
b. ascertained by some form of public
T. oceeding, capable of being so conducted
~ To preclude the possibility of an abuse
OF the practice. Upon the same principle,
the British Government has for a long
time steadily refused to make extradtions
as mere matter of comfy between gov
ernments.
In the second place. when extraditions
nre made under treaty, the causes for the
demand and for the surrender are sp ecnc;
mud proof must be made not only of the
identity Of the individual, but that the stip-
II ated cause for extradition exists. How
ever arbitrary within its own dominions
any Government may be; whatever may
BE- the forms or the want OF forms of its
judicial institutions; whatever may be its
habitual Indifference to the personal lib
erty Of individuals, IL it Is bound bv treaty
20 make eNtraditions for assigned causes,
on proof of the existence of the cause aud
of the identity of the person, it cannot be
asked TO act in any other way, aud thore-
fore II cannot act in any other way.
The liberty Of individuals under
the most despotic and arbitrary gov
ernnent' in the world is thus, to
an important extent, secured by the
principles which govern other nations that
are more careful OF the rights of indivIdu-
ais. spain, or Turkey, or Egypt, or any
other country whore such n thing as the
English writ OF habels corpus is entirely un-
known ana whore the Executive can seize
any person and render no account To any
BODY, Is told by the example of En- gland
and the United states that those powers
will not make or ask for extradtions as a
m re undelinei aud unregllatei favor
tween Government ana Governm cut,
but that extraditions shall be regulated
by fixed principles that become public
law as soon rs they are incorporated into
Al international agreem ent, il Is plain that
the personal liberties OF individuals re-
r"ive thereby, even in the worst governed
large degree Of that protection
which belongs 10 the spirit aud institutions
Di The lreer countries.
On the other hand. nothing can be worse,
nothing eau be more unbecomng in the
conduct OF such Government as ours,
than the practice OF treating the extradi-
ton of individuals as Il thing to be trans
acted spasmodically between Government
and Government, in payment for fayors
of the same kind, in cases where one such
act Is to be set of against another, in re-
,e.nition of nothing but :.lc ract that the
hing has been done by one of the parties,
who is TO be paid in kind by the doing of
he same thing by the other. This is what
'o-called comfy amounts to, and all that IL
amounts to. You surrender to me anybody |
you wish to get hold Of and / will recipro- |
ate; neither of us need be bound by any |
avs, or be confined to any assigned |
.auses. Reciprocity in the act Of surren-
Ter is the only thing to be considered. At |
present, you owe me one, two or three |
'ases of surrender. | will credit you in |
he account with any sort of IA case, no |
matter what may DO the circumstances.
thls Is what i called comfy in such case.
But the surrrndegs that arr made bv
.reaty stipulation are made under that
which has the force of law; they are not
mere bargains between the Executives of
NE two countries for the graulcltion OF
heir respective wishes. They are the re-
ults of principles OF action agreed upon /
between the two nations whose public |
will has laid down the limitations of GER |
ain specific! causes, has pres .rlbed the |
proofs, has excluded the operation of The |
arbitrary Will, Ok Kings or Ministers, Pres-
dents or Secretaries OF State, and has put
put OF the question favoritism or cOmpcn-
satlon Of tse Cor case. or any other hidden