The Savannah morning news., 1902-07-27


Tho case Of Gaynor and Greene has
z-own attention afresh to the rela-
.ions of the United States with other
.ountries as to the extradition of flu
-;,ives from justice, says the Washing
con correspondence of the New York
past. The technicality on which the
canadian authorities are liable to
s+and-that there is a variance be-
tween the offense for which we are
demanding the extradition of the run
quay contractors and that for which
We purpose trying them in the United
states courts-is absurd. We have
not asked the Canadian courts to try
the fugitives for us; yet that is what
y would amount to If their surrender
we're refused on the ground that they
are not guilty of the crime for which
we intend to try them, wholly apart
from the question whether our de-
mand is based on an offense which is
recognized by the extradition treaty
between the British government and
ours.
If we were to demand the surrender
IF the two men for an offense rec
ognized by treaty, and later try them
for another and wholly different one,
we should put ourselves into a po-
sition of extreme aWkWardness, to
saw the least. Such a thing would
have been considered, in the days when
war was regarded less seriously than
now, an international insult which
could be wiped out only in blood. In
these more practical times it would
probably result simply in the service
of diplomatic notice upon us by the
British government Of the abrogation
of the treaty, and we should stand
shamed in the presence of the world
as a nation capable of a gross act of
bad faith. But if we were to bring
the men back under demand couched
in treaty terms, which covered, un-
der a slightly different phase, the
same actual offense for which we put
them on trial in the United States,
there could be no just ground for
cavil.
Or. again, if it should appear that
the offence for which we brought them
back on extradition proceedings were
incapab BILE of proof in a United States
court, but before they had passed out
of the Jurisdiction of the state of Geor-
gia that state should indict and con-
Wet them on a charge of an entirely
different character, it is questionable
whether the United States government
would have any authority to intervene
on the theory that we must first let
them return to Canada and then let
the Georgia authorities apply through
the Federal channels for their extra
dition once more to stand trial in
state court. The latest opinions are to
the effect that the federal government
should not intervene in such a case on
its own initiative.
International Comfy.
1t may be inquired whether, If the
Canadian courts are going to make a
point of our intention to try Gaynor
and Greene on some other charge than
that stated in our request, it would not
be wiser for us to apply directly for
their extradition on grounds outside of
the scope of the treaty, and have no
further question about 1T. Here comes
in very interesting consideration.
Between friendly nations bound by no
treaty of eXtradition, it is not uncom-
mon to request the surrender of fugi-
tive criminals on grounds of inter-
national comfy. Our own government
now and then has asked such a favor,
and, though somewhat grudgingly, has
granted one: but the governments be-
most a matter of course are those
which do not guard the rights of the
citizen or subject very Zealously when
they seem to come into temporary con-
flict with the public good. Spain turn
ed Tweed over to the United States on
the general principle that he belonged
to the class of raScalS who ought to be
treated as common enemies of society.
We had surrendered Arguelles to Spain
on a similar ground, expressed thus by
Mr.. Seward in his answer as Secretary
of State to a Senate resolution of in
quiry:
Although there is conflict OF au-
thorities concerning the expediency of
exercising comfy towards a foreign
government by surrendering at its re-
quest one of it's own subjects charged
with the commission of crime within
its territory, and although it may be
conceded that there is no national
obhga ton to make such a surrender
upon a demand therefor unless it is
acknowledged by treaty or by statute
law, yet a nation Is never bound to
furnish asylum to dangerous crimi-
nails, who are offenders against the
human race"
Here was a case where, in the alb
sence of any treaty, comfy served
better than no ground at all. Where
treaty exists, however, It seems
proper to hold fast to it's terms; and
although such a practice might not be
adhered to with extreme rigor between
countries like Spain and Russia ard
the Ottoman Empire, it undoubtedly
would between Great Britain and the