New-York tribune., 1917-07-21
Cocchi and Italian Law
Why 1t Is Impossible to Extradlte a
Self-Confessed Murderer
be Editor of the Tribune.

To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: Italy's refusal to accede 70 the de-
mand Of the United States for the extract
ton of Cocchi is so generally misunderstood
that justice demands a plain statement Oh
her reasons for this refusal. And the matrer
is very simple: Italy cannot permit the
extradition of Cocchi without violating her
own fundamental law.
Article 9 of the Italian Penal Code pro-
vides that mo citizen can be extradited once
he has come within the jurisdiction OF the
law of his country" In other words, once an
Italian citizen reaches Italian territory he Is
subject to Italian law, and to no other.
This, however, does not mean that ne
will escape punishment for crime ihe
italian Penal Code provides for the triai
in Italy of Italian citizens who may have
committed crimes in other countries. Inc
legal machinery is designed to give tuii
iustice 20 the country whose laws have heen
broken. There is no possibility OF Cocch'
escape, for he has confessed, ana uhue'
Italian law mans confession makes ms
conviction certain if the main facts De
corroborated. II is not necessary LOT wiz
nesses to testify in person; their depositiohs
suffice. In this case the depositions can De
taken here and sent TO Italy for the lriai'
Cocchi's conviction of murder is more
certain in Italy than it would be in New
York. And his punishment Will be more
severe. for, instead Of an instantaneous and
practically painless death in the electric
chair, he will suffer seven years OF Hvlng
death alone in a small dim cell, with
neither a book nor a paper TO read' anu
seeing never a soul, not even his Jailers'
after which he will pass all the rest OF ms
life in prison. II he go mad, as many do'
he will be transferred to an asylum Tor the
criminal insane, there TO spend the rest
of his life. In neither case Is there legal
loophole through which he can slip; there
are no writs of habeas corpus that can De
iuggled with until some complacent Judge
or Jury be found to set him free. There
is no possibility of escape except through
death
1t has been urged that the treaty of 1878
provides for extradition between Italy and
the United States, and that in living up to
her domestic laws Italy is violating her
treaty. No international lawyer would so
interpret the treaty; for this provides only
for the extradition of persons not OF
Citizens" This is no quibble, as every one
who has read Roman law or is familiar
with Roman history knows. Italian law is
essentially Roman law brought up to date.
The one, like the other, recognizes an es-
sential difference between "persona" and
"cives" The civis, cittadino, or citizen is
vested with very definite legal rights which
the mere "person" does not possess. Under
the treaty Italy would grant a demand for
the extradition of any one not an Italian
citizen; but the Italian citizen in Italy has
the inherent right of trial under Italian law
precisely as the Roman citizen had the
right of appeal TO Caesar.
happen to know that Italy's ruling
statesmen regret deeply their inability to
surrender Cocch At the present moment
they would do anything in their power to
please the United States, but they are
bound by the fundamental law of the land,
which they may not violate even to oblige a
friend.
Aside from the purely statutory aspect Of
the case, Italy's attitude is in accord with
the natural law. For, when a boy commits
depredations in a neighbor's yard the neigh
Dor Furnishes him if he can catch him on the
premises, but if the boy escapes TO his own
home, IL is indeed an unnatural father who
accedes to the neighbor's demand that the
boy be returned to him for punishment.
The father replies: mo, I will do the pun
shing myself" ARTHUR BENNINGTON.
New York, July 10, 1917.