The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1876-06-05
win.iow Indefinitely demanded.

may be taken, we trust, as evidence that the
British government sees the untenable
character of its position, and that it is now
merely taking time to effect a graceful and
respectable retreat. The fact which has
leaked out in England as well as here, that
in his last despatch upon this subject Lord
Derby abandons his former base, which was
the net Of Parliament Of 1870 and tries an
other tack, shows not only that he feels the
weakness Of his argument but also that
those Grown lawyers" under whose advice
a British Minister acts have at last taken
the trouble to read the act, and have found
there, as we pointed out month ago, sec
ton which expressly exempts the treaty
with the United States from the operation OF
the act
The facts of the case are very simple and
not liable to dispute. The treaty was made
in 1912 Since then the uniform custom Of
the British, as we'll as the American courts,
has been, wherever it was necessary in the
ADMINISTRATION of justice, to hold and try sur
rendered criminals not only for the specific
offence for which they were extradited, but
for others In some cases even British
courts have tried surrendered criminals for
offences not mentioned in the treaty and
not extraditable therefore, as, for instance, in
the case of Heilbronn, which we cited among
several others month ago, where the man,
surrendered by the United States for forgery,
and acquitted before British court, was
then Immediately tried and convicted for
larceny, which, under the treaty, is not
an extradition crime. We notice in some of
the English journals o suggestion that the
attention Of the British Foreign Office was
not called to this and other cases of the same
kind; but we trust Lord Derby is not going
to plead neglect of duty as IN excuse. That
would be too much. 1t would be to say to
the United States, eve will break, when
ever we please, the rule we are now setting
up against you;" and even then the plea
would be worthless, for there are several
cases-those of Burley, surrendered to US for
robbery, and tried here for on attempt to
kill; of Caldwell, surrendered to us for for
gerry and tried here for bribing an officer,
and others Of the same kind, which would
show, if ignorance or carelessness were
pleaded by Lord Derby, an amount Of it
which would make the British government
ridiculous
1t has been suggested in this country that
unless some limit is fixed as to the trial of
persons surrendered under extradition trea-
ties the right of asylum for political Offend
ers may be endangered; but the answer is
@1,ck ;, cr<1
kind urged in England; no political offender
is in question; nor has there ever been any
dispute between the two governments on
this point, though we have had two treaties,
that of 1874 and the present one, in neither
of which is any reservation made about
Our government would probably consent
very readily to make reservation in
any new treaty; but the surrender
of Winslow is claimed not as
hypothetical case, but under the
plain stipulations of the treaty of 1912, and
in consonance with the established interpre-
tation of that treaty, as admitted by Lord
Hammond, Under Secretary for Foreign Al
fairs in his evidence before special COM
mittee of the House of Commons, on this
very question, when he said, "We admit in
this country that if man is bona .fde tried
for an offence for which he was given up
there is nothing to prevent his being suisse
quently tried for another offence, whether
antecedently committed or not" That on
act of Parliament cannot alter the effect Of
treaty was admitted in 1866 by Lord Derby
himself, who then, as Lord Stanley, said in
the House Of Commons concerning an at
tempt to change the limitations of the Extra
dition Treaty with France, :" In case like
this international courtesy demands that the
treaty. shall not be materially altered
without communication with the other
party" In the same discussion Lord
Cairns, now Lord Chancellor, said that the
net proposed to introduce new ingredient
into the bargain which did not exist ut the
time the bargain was made" He added
ITO put such words into an net Of Parlia-
ment which did not exist in the treaty
would only be Offering gratuitous insult to
the foreign Power to whom it applied with
ont securing any real advantage"
Inc rlSnt Oh polltlcal asylum lS sacred.
No administration in this country would be
allowed to palter with it. But it is not here
in question, for neither Lawrence,
whose case excites SO deep an in
terest in England, nor Winslow, is a
political offender. In any new extradtion
treaty we should hope to see special reser-
vation made Of political offenders. 1t is
crcditable to the two governments-ou own
and that of Great Britain that, in the abb
sence of any stipulation in the treaties Of
1874 and lS42, no serious dispute has ever
occurred on this subject. But the act Of
Parliament of 1870, which was intended to
guard the right of asylum, does so in a
clumsy way, needessly obstructive of JUS
tice. The truth is, it was framed not by
l,,t he tl~1, go.