New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-08-26
THE BAR ASSOCIATION.
COMMITTEE REPORTS READ AT THE
SARATOGA MEETING.
TIL PROPOSITION TO GIVE FEDERAL COURTS
JURISDICTION IN CRIMINAL PRoSBCU-
T1oNs FOR ACTS OF VIOLENCE TO
ALIENS SOT FAVORED.
rBY TELEGRAPH TO THE TxIBUSE.r

rBY TELEGRAPH TO THE ThIBrNEt
sorotoea Aug. Eek Conf ressman John Randolph
tucker. Of Virginia today made the annual address
before the American Bar Association. II was schoi-
sy and brilliant effort. consuming two hours In Its
delivery. The reports OF the standing committees on
jurisprudence and Law Reform. Judicial Adminstra
lion and Remedial Procedure Legal Education and Ad
mission TO the Bar Commercial Law and International
Law were then read. That Legal Education closed
with the recommendation that the laws regulat-
Ing admission 10 the bar should require az
least two years study before the candidate
shall be entitled 10 be examined. An amend
mcnt wss pVpcNcA taN three years should
be recommended the minimum time and elected a
lively discussion. A proposition to put up three
bars against ambitious legal students was defeated
only five members arising to sustain the amendment
on the division called for. The Recommendation OF
the committee was then adopted. The resolution
gave rise to debate and the matter was postponed.
BY resolution adopted at the last meeting OF the
association the Committee International Law was
directed TO report the next annual meeting whether
any legislation by Congress is desirable and prac
tcsble 10 give the of the United States juris
dIcon criminal prosecutions for acts OF violence
10 the persons property Of aliens committed by
citizens of the United States.' The committee, in It's
report read today quotes the bill introduced in the
senate. and refers TO the debates in that body on
this subject. which action was based Oh suggestion
l n
gays:
IL is worthy just here that the NewOrleans
incident March 1891 not the first of like character
which engaged the attention OF the Federal Govern
ment will be hereafter. Never before however
has been suggested that such remedy as is now pro-
posed either or expedient Similar contn
rencie during the administration Of the state De
narnent by Secretaries Webster Evarts and Bayard all
ahs LAWYERS and yet OF them to have con-
deed that what characterized by them all as oc
cnrrences unfortunate and sometimes dsgraceu afforded
either for radical ana FUNDAMENTAL
change in institutions consideration the pro-
posed legislation would make.
1t Is impossible TO controvert the fact that THIS ass
lion In favor OF Federal legislation originated not In the
thoughtful consideration Of lawyers or pu6lcis but IN
nhemera newspaper discussion, which. useful as Is
must Of necessity impusive and upon such subjects
serve the purpose rather OF suggestion than conclusion
The suggestion by President IL OF course entitled
respect both by reason OF his high ONCE
and OF his acknowledged capacity as state 'man
and lawyer There is however, nothing in tho message
which beyond calling the attention OF Congress TO
the subject expression OF belief the competency
Of Congress treaty rights Of foreigners domced
in the United States is likely TO be controverted pro-
vided only that such treaty rights are consistent with
the Constitution OF the United States. The President
devise legislation and IL is not 10 be assumed
that anticipated the action Of Congress by such
an OF the subject would be required Of
him II bill passed by both houses should be presented
for his signature.
The position question before upon
suggestion added the OF responsibility felt
BY the committee and all things considered, it may
probably be said that few questions have been before
the association at important and
The inquiry contained in the resolution embraces
questions first Is such legislation desirable and second is
1t practicable.
Before proceeding consideration Of these
tons will doubtless be helpful 10 state the which
have occurred adoption Of the Constitution similar
general character that which has occasioned the
present discussion.
The report then discusses the case Of Mcleod,
British subject, who indicted for murder In this
State and whose release demanded by his Gov
ernment and the affair of the Spanish orages in New
Orleans in ISL both under Secretary Webster whose
writings the are quoted also the riots at
Key West at the same time, ana mob violence on
Chinese in recent years cited and the action OF
Secretaries Evarts and Blaine shown. The report
cites other international cases in which the principle
laid down by the United States that redress for such
grievances must be through the regular tribunals is
maintained, notably by the British Government. 1t
then goes on 10 say:
The bill pending IN Senot already quoted. is very
general its terms and simply adopts the criminal law
Of State giving the Federal courts jurisdiction
for the prosecution Of act which constitutes crime
under the law OF the State when committed In violation
O, the rights secured citizen subject OF foreign
country with whose Government we are IN treaty reo-
lions This Is stated broadly than the language
Of me would warrant, but not more so than
the claims OF the advocates Of the bill as to ito scope
and purpose 1t is hardly IN b. expected that, " this
OF legislation be embarked upon Congress would
undertake the enactment iew and uniform system OF
criminal procedure We therefore, assume
any bill likely be POSED would be general ono
OF the character OF that pending.
The necessity Of bill is camed the ground that
laws should conform to treaty obligations, 20
that when questioned what we are doing TO protect
the treaty rights OF foreign people, can always thswer
'1he laws Of Congress confer jurisdiction upon the
Federal your contract is with the Federal courts
with the Government OF The United States, and We
are therefore, made party" Thus the United Sctes
as the teatymaking power, would be able to enforce
treaty obligations, and would not be forced as In tho
when the supreme power has depended entirely upon
State ection In contempt in the presence OF
the nations Of the earth.'
Finally they believe that the proposed is nos
only Practicable but is less objectionable than other
that could been devised because IL does not inter
fere with change the laws Of the several states In re-
gard what constitutes a crime and does not provide
different penalty for against the rights OF allen
and act which is crime against citizen OF the State
while II che Federal should adopt the laws OF
the STATE. there would be two laws making different
offence Of the same act a given State.
Again the farreachne character Of this bill can hardly
be appreciated anticipated 1t stated in the Senate
that there aliens in Chicago alone and that
possibly one-thrd but certainly one-nfh. Of the
laton OF Wisconsin is alien the conditions 70 a
greater less degree obtain in many OF the Northwestern
States Think Of the endless confusion which would
result from the division Of the criminal administration OF
those States between two jurisdictions In such manner
that possibly may be subject 10 two prosecutions
or the offence and this inconvenience Is To be In
urred provide q remedy for sporadic cases, which,
fter all no law any country has eyer able eier
20 prevent remedy, and OF which have had cx-
icty half dozen In history as a nation.
Ths another unsertanty 10 whether under
this bll be tried twice for the same offence
The bill adopts tho criminal law OF STATE, but IL also
males any act which is crime against the State like
crime against United States IT, then, accused
Is TIED State and that tribunal holds thot the
Get complained OF crime under the law CT tho
State. would his acquai be erectual his dis
charge upon trial for the offence in the United
State, Court Upon this precise question: the effect
b H. able LAWYERS differed Senate,