Swansea and Glamorgan Herald, and South Wales Free Press. — 1864-09-14 (Swansea, West Glamorgan, Wales)

NEWTON.) AUGUST 27. The hearing on the extgrdition case of Franz Muller, charged with the murder of Mr Thomas Briggs, near Hackney, London, on the 9th July last, was resumed this morning before Commissioner Newton. The British Government, through its Consul at this poet, was represented by Mr F. F. Marbury ; the accused by his askigntd counsel, Messrs Chauncey Shaffer and Edmon Blackman. The examination took place in the United States District Court-room, which was thronged with persons who evinced the greatest interest in the proceedings. and who anxiously sought for a view of the accused. The latter sat beside his counsel, with an unmoved countenance and a calm demeanour, apparently the most uninterested and unaffected person in the densely crowded court. Mr Chauncey Shaffer defended the prisoner at some length. In the course of his remarks he said he was not present to-day to quarrel with the policy of England, but he would fearlessly state at the outset that he did not regard the treaty under which it was sought to extradite this man as anything else than a violation of the Constitution of the United States, and utterly inoperative. It was an elementary principle recognized by the law of nations that a state of war between two nations suspended the operations of all treaties. But it might be said that there was no war between this country and England—neither was there in their sovereign relations and capacity; but there was war notwithstanding. There did exist what the eminent Grotius termed "a mixed and unsolemn state of war" between the two nations—between the subjects of England on the one side and the subjects of the United States, as represented in her commerce on the ocean, on the other. The test was easy of application. For instance, the officers who were there in court to-day representing their Sovereign, while in pursuit of this man, supposed to have his hands red with the blood of his Lllow-man, were actually afraid that this supposed murderer would escape punishment. Why? What gave rise to their fear? The fear that a pirate vessel, infesting the ocean —the great highway of nations—a vessel sent out from the friendly English ports by British subjects— would snatch from British justice that which British justice was in pursuit of—it was Britain committing suicide upon her own justice. That is a state of war, and that state of things, by the common consent of mankind, suspends all treaties between the countries. There is that hospitality on the part of English subjects towards this country which the writers on international law denominate "mixed and nnsolemn war," and which can be carried on without any formal declaration of war. Look at the case of the steamer running from this port to Portland, in Maine, seized by pirates—the engineer murdered, passengers murdered, the vessel brought into an English port, and the murderers and pirates protected by British subjects. But as in the case before the court, when a man is found murdered near London, they pursue the supposed murderer to our shores, and cry, " Treaty, treaty, treaty." They tore that treaty to pieces three years ago. (Applause). The torch has been applied by 04 pirate 'Florida,' built and sent out by English subjects—a robber on the highway of nations, murdering our citizens, and destroying our commerce, and humiliating the nation before the world, so that no longer it is an honour to claim to be an American citizen. This was not so much the act of the Government or of the people as of the aristocracy, who misrepresented the Government and the people. The latter were true to liberty and to the United States, God bl se them. This treaty, then, under which the rendition of this man is demanded, is suspended, and is a dead letter, until this mixed and unsolemn state of war on the part of British subjects against the Government ceases. England, to claim this man, must come into court with clean hands. She must not come here and ask of us to honour her justice when she dishonours her own justice, breaks her treaties, and cries peace and neutrality, while at the same time she lets slip the dogs of war, and with piratical vessels drives our peaceful commerce from the ocean. This cannot long continue. Better for us we had war at once, when we could send out our cruisers and assert our rights of retaliation on the ocean. (Applause). Leaving the case of his client in the hands of the Court, he would close. Inspector Tanner was examined as to the height of the prisoner and his personal appearance, to show that he could not be one of the two men seen in the. compartment of the carriage with Mr Briggs on the night of the murder. This ended the case for the defence. Mr Marburg, for the British Government, then ad• dressd the Court. He contended that the evidence which had been adduced showed clearly and conchssively that the prisoner was guilty of the murder with which he was charged. Let the Court only 'consider the following chain of facts. On Saturday evening, July