National Republican., 1886-09-10
Mr.. Bayard Goes Too Far.


We think It was grave blunder for the
partisan friends Of the Secretary OF State to
charge that the opposition TO his position
on the Cutting case was inspired by Repub-
lican leaders for political effect. The fact
is that the strongest dissent has been ex.
pressed by Democratic newspapers, sec
onded by such journals as the New York
Times, Post, and Hdrper's Weekly. We
hold that in all international questions II is
the duty Of the press to heartily support
the Secretary of State, irrespective Of par
ties, If the true interests Of the country
will permit; and we believe that the Repub-
lican press is inspired by such motives.
But, on the other hand, we maintain the
right Of the press, especially in the incipieut
stages Of any international question, to ex-
anime the facts and the law In patriotic
spirit, to ascertain what the real interests
Of our own country require. II is with this
object in view that we have prepared and
publish this morning q review Of the law OF
the Cutting case in It's present aspects. We
think that Mr.. Bayard's position, II per-
sisted In, will lead to serious Inconsistency,
II not grave embarrassment on our part. 1t
will be seen that he is squarely opposed by
the latest and most authoritative exposition
Of our own law, as to extra territorial jurls.
diction, by the law adviser OF the State De.
partment, DR.. Wharton.
II is also seen that the statutes OF the
| United States and many Of our states con-
tain provisions more or less similar TO the
Mexican code, which It is understood
| gocraiorv Ravord Ja,nanda rnnat ha ahro
gated. Such claim implies reciprocity on
our part. Is the state Of New York, for
instance, prepared to modify or repeal the
| provisions of its code on the subject OF
extra territorial Jurisdiction so soon after It's
adoption as the result Of years OF study and
discussion by the ablest lawyersS VIII the
state Of Texas be willing to make an ex.
ception In favor Of Mexican cltizensp We
very much doubt that Mr.. Bayard can In
| duce these states to take such action and,
If not, how can he insist upon the repeal Of
the Objectionable law Of the Mexican state
Of chihuahua
But there is broader view Of the ques-
ton. Is It for the best interests OF our
government and its citizens that Mr..
Bayard should persist in that demand I
Lest we should be charged with partisan
motives in answering this question, we
prefer to have the reply come from prom
inent Democratic journal. The Chicago
Times, in discussing the subject, says:
If We admit, for example, the postulato oil
Mr.. Bayard, that the constitution of this couu.
trywill not permit an American citizen that has
established his residence in a foreign country
to be tried under the laws and In the tribunals
Of that country for n crime that he has chosen
to commit in this country against the subject
| ofthat (the act being also q crime under ouI
| own laws, then, Of course, we must conced {
the same to the constitutional authority of that
country with respect to its rogues that take up
their residence in this land.
The Times does not believe, and will not
consent, that Mr.. Biyard, or any other man
| shall curtail in that fashion the effective au.
thority Of our constitution within our own
boundaries. The Tins believes. AM will
maintain, that this republic is constitution
ally clothed with all the authority and power,
upon its own territory, that any nation of the
| earth possesses, with respect 10 all offenders
agoinst 1t or its citizens that are found within
Its limits, whatever their nationality may be,
and wherever their oiTenses may have been
committed. What could this nation
| gam py denying the general rule OF interna
tonal law, and abdicatlug the sovereign right
over Its own territory that all other civilized
nations recognize, and that the majority o
them have embodied in their penal laws? w
could not change the rule. We could not per-
suade France, Spain, Italy, Austria, Prussia
BAVARIA Norway, nor even Mexico, to chang,
their penal laws to suit the views of Mr. Bay
ard. Mr.. Bayard has taken hold o
the wrong end of the stick. 1t is not In dero
CATION of but in defense of our constitutional
independence, sovereignty, and right tina
the Times tells him plainly that 1t is necessary
| to letgo.