New-York tribune., 1910-06-24
ITALY MAY NOT SEEK HIM
Has Refused Extradition of Sub
jeCts Committing Crimes Here.
LQOPHOLE FOR CHARLTON
IF Italian Government Doesn't
Claim Him, No American Cour1i
Gould Punish Him.
[From The Tribune Bureau ]

Washington, June 23-The fate of
Porter Charlton, who confessed to-day
the killing of his wife, rests between
and Italy Italy has steadfastly refused
to surrender her own citizens, when
under indictment, to any other coun-
try. on the ground that they are not
referred to in the extradition treaty with
Italy. signed in 1866, which makes no
reference to the citizens of either coun-
try. but only to persons committing
crimes
It is entirely probable that Italy. fol-
lowing out consistently the course it has
previously adopted, will not make a de-
mapd for Charlton. The Italian govern
ment, in the case of Vincenzo ViIlela and
Giuseppe Bevivino who took refuge in
Italy in 1899 after committing atrocious
murders in Pennsylvania, refused to sur
render the criminals, but tried them in
the courts of their own country and SEN
fenced one to twenty years and the other
to fifteen years imprisonment
1t Is difficult to see how the Italian
government, having asserted in principle
and in practice the right of dealing with
its own citizens in these cases, can
ignore the precedent so esta bIished by
asking of the United States the surren-
der of Charlton. In view of the fact
crime was also an American, it is not
likely that the Italian authorities will
be disposed TO resort to extraordinary
measures to secure the perpetrator in
order that he may be punished. Charlton
may, therefore, go entirely free, as 1t
is doubtful if any court in this country
could establish jurisdiction for his trial
for a crime committed in ItaIy.
State Department Might Refuse.
In the two cases mentioned and in the
case of Salvatore Paladino the Italian
government has refused the extradition
of it's own citizens. Even if the demand
is made for Charlton there is stHl ques-
tion whether the State Department
would be willing to accede to it,
A refusal would not be strictly con-
sistent with the constructions placed
upon the treaty of extradition by previ-
Gus Secretaries of State. perhaps, but
extradition could be denied on the
ground that Italy has invalidated any
claim under the existing convention by
it's refusal to acknowledge such right
on the part of the United States
OF the previous attitude of the United
States with regard TO the extradition of
citizens there can be no question II
was clearly defined by James c. Blaine,
when Secretary of State. in his note to
Baron Fava. the Italian Minister. in
1890 Il am forced to conclude" he
said, not only that International law
does not except citizens from surrender,
but also that IL has been well under
stood especially in dealing with the
United States, that the term persons
includes citizens and requires their ex-
tradition. unless they are expressly ex-
empted.
Nor am l able TO find sufficient
ground for the refusal to surrender citi-
zens in the general principles on which
extradition is conducted. It does not
satisfy the ends OF justice TO say that.
although a nation does not extradite it's
citizens. 1t undertakes To try and punish
them The chief object Of extradition Is
To secure the punishment of crime at the
place where it was committed. In ac-
cordance with the law which was then
and there of paramount obligation
This note had the effect of eIiciting
from the Italian government the draft
OF a supplementary treaty. in which the
declaration was made that neither coun-
try should be obliged to surrender its
own citizens or subjects. This was re-
iected by Secretary Gresham. who re-
piled: NO good reason is perceived
why the citizens of the United States
who commit crimes in Italy. or Italian
subjects who commit crimes in the
Continued second page