National Republican., 1886-09-17

been abolished, IL he has not suffered the en-
tire penalty, the trial may bo renewed by the
Tribunals 81 the Kingdom taking into account
These quotations arc sufficient 10 show that
saving The provision applying the least pm
ishment zen. OF those pI9serloea by both s,tatutes
ical, article of the Italian code Is slbstan.
TALLY 1856 of ours, and article Is lS6, Of which
so much has been said in connection with the
Cutting case. There is another difference, aud
II is that the Mexican code requires, in para
graph o that the violation Of which the for
eigner Is accused should demand moro Sc
(drreaO mayor, while that Of Italy does not
limit It's provisions in that way. Tho general
arrangement of our article and four Of It's live
requisites are reproduced In that which have
just quoted, a coincidence very notable in
matter like this In which n nation, without
incurrlng censurc, may freely select one or
another Kind from among rival doctrines, re.
spccling the terrtoriality, personalltyo extra
territorial action of punishments
Let us see now, although very briefly, the
reasons which NJ. Mancini had for adopting
the provisions ofarticle OF the italian penal
code.
~ viii examine" ho says, "the subject
guiGed by the sound and general lly-admitted
principles Of international law. The first anl
fundamental of these is that of the reciprocal
independence of nations aud OF the political
s2vssfGpgs sn Which rule IN ~ ITEM en- T6is prin
In every country exclusively to the action of
the national government, ezcludlngwith zeal
ous care al inieIierence by foreign govern
tTinc that which attributes TO another sover-
eignty without special judicial right concur
rent Jurisdiction TO repress niractions Of public
order occurring In n foreign land when the
inifactors are not citizens OF the country which
at Is, nevertheless necessary to seek spe-
cial right,which may put In operation in spco-
fed cases the penal Jurisdiction of state for
crimes committed abroad, and this right can
not be the same for oilenscs which our citizens
commit ana those committed by foreigner.
Moreover, In all these cases the authority Of
the legislator and the jurisdictional competency
of the judge should not be confoundcd."
NJ MHncini then demonstrates that the origin
Of the Jurisdiction of a country 10 punish one
Of It's citizens when he commits an oilense
abroad and returns to IFS territory, is not solely
the personal statute but also the public con-
venience and utility, ana ailer various consld.
erations, he adds:
"1n the other Hypothesis that whore the dc.
iinquent abroad is foreigner, provided that
his ohense Injuries one OF our citizens, or in
general the Italian state or administration,
ana besides the act Is an Oilensc In both ma.
tions, II is likewise seen that the interest In
punishment, for the safety OF social order, per-
taine to both states, and hence there is created
in them n Legitimate concurrence, both in tho
exercise Of the legislative authority as also in
the jurisdiction OF the tribunals, although with
the same order of prevention and preference"
Will not proong my quotations. my only
object being to call your attention TO what was
set forth by NJ. Mancini, as with his authority
and reasons 1t is demonstrated that our article
ls6 Is net contrary TO sound principles of leyls-
latiop, That II has n general similarity to the
provisions OF the last Penal Code Of
10 Mr.. Bayard,. Is proved by the quo
tations made In the present note, and although
II is true that said code is not yet in force, that
has been on account of the difficulties respect
ing Its second part, which has not yet been re-
yised by the chamber of deputies OF that coun.
try, not on account of book first, which was
definitely approved In 1877, as have before
said. Our article also has analogy with the
legislation of various other European nations
on the general subject OF punishing crimes
committed abroad by foreigners. when they
ailerward come into the country, thus subject
Ing themselves to Its laws. This is seen in the
citations of the foreign codes in Senor Gam.
boas article. For this reason Il is not believed
that II Is opposed to International law, how
ever much IL may be desired to bring this OBJ.
lection against 1t.
Ishouid, finally notice that, although the
legislation of some OF the German states re-
ferrcd to by Senor Gambon, and TO which
| allude In my previous note Is not that which
Is now in force for the reason that In 1872 q
| still the new code adopted the system of eX-
| tending the criminal jurisdiction to infractions
| Of the law committed out OF the country in
| certain cases. even by foreigners
Inclosed / send You (annex No. y q mem)-
randum of the principal laws which at differ
ent time, have imposed punishment on sub.
| Jects Of the state for crimes and oaenses per-
petfated abroad, and of others which have
| declared the otiense punishable even when
committed by foreigners.
renew to you my attentive consideration.
MARisCAL.
To the MEXICAN MINISTER, Washington.
| Enclosure No. /.
List of nations whose laws impose punish.
ment on the subjects Of the state for crimes
committed abroad:
France Code of Grim Inst. and law July g.
1866 Austria, Penal Code of 1872; Italy, Penal
Code of Sardinia of 1885, Belgium, law OF Oct
| 80, 1886; Portugal, Penal Code of 1852; Greece
Penal Code of 1884; Ionic Islands, Penal Code
Of 1871; Holland, Code of Grim. Inst; MOI way
| Penal Code OF 1912; Russia, Penal Code; Ba
varn Penal Cede of 1861: Prussia, Penal Code
| of 1901; Wurtemberg, Penal Code OF 1889; Sax
| ony, Penal Code of 1898; Baden. Penal Code OF
| 1915; 0ldenburg, Penal Code OF 1Sli Bruins.
| wick, Penal Code of 1910; Hesse. Penal Code o.
| lSll; German empire, Penal Code put in force
| by the law of May 10, 1872
| List OF nations whose laws declare punish.
| able all or certain crimes committed abroad
by foreigners, when the latter enter their terri
tory.
France, Code of Criminal Instruction. and
law of July 2, 1866; Austria, Penal Code; Portu
| gal, Penal Code; Italy, Penal Code of 1859 aud
Book OF the code proposed by Sig, Mancini
approved 1877; Belgium, Penal Code; Norway
Penal Code Bavaria, Penal Code; Prussia
Penal Code; Nuremberg, Penal Code; Saxony
Penal Code; Baden, Penal Code; Oldenburg
Penal Code; Brunswick, constitution, articl
205 Hanover, Penal Code: German empire
Penal Code ordered to be observed by the Law
Of May 10, 1872.