The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-12-10
HOPE STILL REMAINS IN
PROVING ACCUSED INSANE
Decision Declares That QueS.
ton of Mentality Is for the
Courts TO Pass Upon.

/ t'hHNl u'l ClIlESHS 10 lHG OUllcu Ctdlts
! Tor trial docs not relieve this country
from the obligation of the cXtradition
treaty TO surrender 10 Italy fUgitives
| from justice from that country, The
F., question Of the sanitay of Charlton, 1T
is suggested, is ono for the courts, aud
not for the department TO determine.
Had Secretary Knox refrained from
acting upon this case for SIX days. Por'
ter Charlton would have been free, as
the statutes require final action within
sixty days from the date of commit
ment. The legal contention of counsel
of the accused on Italy, refusal to
surrender her own citizens and the
point that the Italian demand for
Charlton S surrender had not been made
In strict compliance with the require.
ments of the treaty arc swept away
by the secretary as without basis. and
the committing magistrate S proceed.
ings are found to have been regular IN
all respects.
a closing remark by the secretary
is significant, carrying the lntlmatIon
that Charlton S attorneys may have
further recourse to the courts if they
are disposed TO raise the question of in
sanity. "The committing magistrate 8
record as transmitted 10 the depart
ment. saws the decision "discloses
no material informality in the proceed
iues, and a case calling for the surren-
der Of the accused under the treaty
! terms is made out, unless such surrcn-
der is TO be defeated by objections
raised by counsel for the accused y
Charlton Still Has Chance.
These objections are, in their order:
THAT the secretary of state should
| decline to surrender the accused and
! the president should direct his dis
| charge because the record OF the COM
mitting magistrate as transmitted 10
the depa rtmcnt docs not contain the
formal demand Of the Italian govern
ment for the surrender of the fugitive
| or show that such demand was made
within the treaty period.
9 Formal demand or 'requlsitlon' of
ono government upon another for the
surrender of fugitive is Of 4 political
character. IT would appear, therefore,
! that The making of n 'rcquisitiOn' is
a matter which primarily concerns the
political branch Of the government
and that all questions regarding the
prOprietv or Sutiiciency Of the form IN
which il is made are for the determine
ton of that branch.
"The first objection raised by coun.
7el FOR the accused in this case, is with
! out merit and of no effect in defeating
extradition. The second objection is
that Charlton should not be surrendered
because under the treaty providing that
each government shall surrender per.
sons fugitive from the one and found
in the other. Italy refused TO surrender
to the United States for trial and pun
ishment Italian subjects who were fugi"
| iives from the Justice Of the United
/ States; therefore, the United States
is relcvd from any obligation to sur"
render its citizens, fugitives from Italy.
This contention, like the first. is with
out merit in this case.
Not Necessarily Reciprocal.
"Its Fundamental fallacy is that an
eXtraditlon treaty must be wholly re-
ciprocal. This is not true Our own
treaties will show. for example. that
upon occasion we have stipulated as.
sistance from foreign governments IN
the matter Of the apprehension of Grim,
inals fugitive from our justice In other
countries where we have not been able
10 grant and do not grant or extend
such assistance in a reciprocal case.
Regarding the attitude OF the Italian
government in the negotiations with
this nation concerning the disposition
of Charlton. the decision says:
HThe course followed by Italy in
the present case indicates, as, indeed
is set forth in the diplomatic CORE
spondeDce. that the government regards
the United States and Italian extradi
tion treaty as being reciprocal as
tive countries. and that. while italy
cannot surrender 10 the United States
for trial and punishment her subjects
fugitive from the justice of the United
States, still the United States is, pur
suant TO its own Interpretation. under
obligations TO surrender 10 Italy for
trial and punishment citizens Of the
United States fugitive from the justice
OF italy.
"Iu this connection it should he OBJ
served that the United States. although
consistently con;eDding that the ltal
ian Interpretation was mol the proper
one has not treated tbe Italian prac.
tice as = breach Of treaty obligation
necessarily requiring abrogation, has
not abroaated the treaty or taken any
slep looking thereto aud. on the con
irarv has constantly regarded the
treaty as in fpil force and effect. and
has answered obligations imposed there
by and has iuvol'ed rights therein
granted IL should, moreover. be OBJ
served that even though the action Of
the Italian government be regarded as
a breach Of the treaty. the treaty is
bnding until abrogated. and therefore.
the treaty not having been abrogatcd
lis provisions are operative against
us. ''
In concluding his memorandum in the
case. Secretary Knox SAYS:
"Counsel for the prisoner also con.
tends that Charlton should not now be
surrendered, because the committing
magistrate refused 10 receive testi-
monv tending to prove his insanity. If
such testimony the prisoner has his
remedy in the courts. and it is not for
the department at this stage Of the
proceedings to pass upon this oues-