The Morning herald., 1876-03-29
WASHINGTON.
THE wINsLOW CASE.

THE WlNSLOW CASGs
EnglanA and ,he ExtFsdAa1on
Treaty-Why Wlnslow 10 not
Brought Aome-A Nice
Question Of Diplo.
nacy to be Set
Settled.
Nv the American Press Association.
WARRINGTON. March, rs.
The British Government has not yet COM
plied with the demand of the United States
for the extradition of E. D. Winslow, and
our Government is still unadvised as to
what course the British authorities will
pursue in the matter; whether they Will
continue to claim that the act of Parliament
Of 1870 Is retroactive and applies to the ex-
tradition treaty of 1s42, or surrender the
fugitive under protest.
The second section of the act of the Brit.
ish parliament of August 9th, 1870, is as
follows:
.sWhere an arrangement has been made
with any foreign State with respect to the
surrender to such State of any fugitive
criminals, Her Majesty may, by order in
Council, direct that this ACT shall apply IL
the case of such foreign State"
That part of the act under which Wins
low is detained, and which provides that
criminals shall not be surrendered unless
law is passed by the Government demand
ing the criminal, providing that he shall
not be tried Tor any other offence than the
one for which he is extradited, reads as fol-
lows:
"The following restriction shall be OBJ
served with respect to the surrender os fu
gitive criminals:
"F;r,t-A fugitive criminal shall not be
surrendered if the offence in respect OF
which his surrender is demanded is one OF
a political character, or if he prove to the
satisfaction of the Police Magistrate or the
court before whom he is brought on habeas
corpus, or to the Secretary of State, that the
reauisition for his surrender has in fact
been made with view to try or punish him
for an offence of political character.
" Sscond-A fugitive criminal shall not
be surrendered to foreign State, unless
provision is made by the law of that State
or by arrangement that the fugitive crimi-
nal shall not, until he has been restored OF
had an opportunity of returning to her Ma.
jesty's Dominions, be detained or tried in
that foreign State for any offence committed
prior to his surrender, other than the extra
dition crime proved by the facts on which
the surrender is grounded
The principle which the British act es-
tablishes is regarded here as correct, But
our government very properly refuses tc
concede that this act sets aside the treaty
of 1912. Since that act was passed by the
British Parliament, negotiations were car
ried on for some time between Secretary
Fish aud Sir Edward Thorton for new ex-
tradition which should cover the point es-
tablished by the act of 1870.
Secretary Fish was not willing that the
power should be vested in the British Po-
lice Magistrates of determining whether the
offence committed by an American criminal
was of political nature. He wanted this
question passed upon, if at all, by g
higher law functionary, and Sir Edward
Thornton was not disposed to yield this
point, and SO the negotiations were brought
to close. 1t is believed here that tht
present state of affairs between the two na
tions on this question cannot continue
much longer, and that the new treaty will
have to be negotiated, or no tice to termi
nate the treaty of 1912 be given the British
Government.
The course taken by Secretary Fish il
this matter is highly commended on al
sides, and confidence is expressed that h'
will manage this matter to reflect grea
credit upon the administration an
himself.