New-York tribune., 1886-08-14
MEXICOS PEACE PROPOSAL.

The Admin stlaion j. reported 10 nave ac-
ccptcd an invitation to send "A special envoy
TO Mexico. The Mexican Government ha-
suggest ed through the American Minister tha'
as the questions which have arisen respecting
Cutting and Rasures turn upon the lntcprcta-
tion of Mexican statutes, a distinguished lawycl
should be instructed TO confer with the AttOr
ncy- General of the Mexican Republic with Il
view to effecting al aInicable ctllcmcnt OF all
matters now at Issue. The Administration l.
believed to have acted iavoIably upon thl,
proposal. The sudden departure OF cX-Scn
ator Mcdonald for Washington in response 70
a summoHs from the State Department tend
to confirm these reports and TO designate him
as the special envoy who will be sent to Mex
leo. This Will I've very sensible proceeding
on the part of the Administration and the cA-
Senator Will l@ a most competent diplOmatI
agent TO report OH the legal merits Of the ca,c
Under existing treaties with Mexico the AmcIi-
car Government i, under moral Obligations to
have recourse to arbitration and every honor
able cxpcdcnt for the maintenance Of peace
These engagements will bc discharged if so en-
incnt lawyer as Mr. Mcdonald bc sent to
thc City OF Mexico to confer with the State
and Law Departments.
There are two questions which the special
envoy will bc required to investigate. FlrsI
whether Cutting has been legally arrested
tried and sentenced under Mexican statutes :.
secondly, whether the proceedings are in viola
ton of generally recognized principles of inter
national law. Urdcr the first head we are con
hdcnt that the Mexican officials will prove then
case Even if Cutting has been pio~ccutcd
for publishing the libel in Texas, rather than
for circulating it in Mexico, the statute con
fcrring upon the courts jurisdiction over Ger
tain offences committed on gn territory
would justify the action of the court. Under
Mexican law he was liable TO prosecution fo
writing and printing the libel in Texas but is
the statute 50 widely at variance with inIcr
rational usage that his release can be legally
demanded the Mexican authorities, we ap-
pIchcnd, will have no great difficulty IN proving
that tho American principle OF restricting lcga,
proceedings to the territorial jurisdiction whclC
the offence is comnticd i not universally
recognized The Belgian, French and Italian
codes cmbody provisions similar to this Mex
lean statute and there are British precedent.
also that may be cited in support Of the same
view. The principle that criminal mast bc
prosecuted where he commits his cIianc has re-
cevcd the saGction OF American law, but can
not be said to be well established canon OF
international law.
ExMinistcr Foster, who speaks author.
tatively ON Mexican affairs, states that this pro
vision OF the code has been in operation fof
some time and that It's enforcement cannot b.
a new matter to the Department of Stale
He cites a dispatch from the diplomatic cores
pondcnce of 1880 describing the trial of a
Mexican for murder committed in Tcxas.
The State Department can hardly expect by
sheer buster to compel the Mexican Lcgislatme
to repeal this law and TO accept the American
doctrine. The mission of the special envoy,
however, and q frank discussion of the question
at issue may lead to the passage of an acl
whereby offences committed by foreign citizen,
can bo transferred from the local tribunals to
Federal courts and thus left to the discretion
of the Federal Government. This is the most