Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 14.pdf/354

 Extradition.

315

within range of national politics; and it is naturalized subject. The demand was sub sequently repeated in more forcible terms; very much to the credit of the United States judicial bench that its members were equal but Holland refused to surrender him. to dealing with the difficult questions that One of the most familiar cases of extradi tion for a political offense was that of Nap- arose. " In the matter of extradition," per Tandy, known popularly as the hero of writes Sir Edward Clarke in his well-known English work upon the subject of this article, the " Wearing of the Green." Tandy, hav ing made a vain attempt to excite a rebellion "the American law was until 1870 better in Donegal, Ireland, set sail for Norway; than that of any country in the world; and and after landing at Bergen, made his way the decisions of the American judges are with a few companions to Hamburg. The the best existing expositions of the duty of English government peremptorily insisted extradition in its relations at once to the on the surrender of the refugees as British judicial rights of nations and the general subjects who were in rebellion against their interests of the civilization of the world." sovereign; while the French government The first case in America which brought up claimed them as citizens, and threatened the surrender of a criminal to a foreign pow-er occurred in 1784. In that year the Hamburg with the most serious consequen ces if they were given up. After a long Chevalier de Longchamps was indicted at and painful hesitation, Tandy and three of Philadelphia for threatening bodily harm his companions were finally surrendered to to M. Marbois, the French consul-general, England in October, 1799. The French and also for an assault upon him. It ap ministry retaliated by a letter declaring war peared that the Chevalier went to the con against the town of Hamburg, imposed an sul's official residence, used violent lan embargo on its shipping, and threatened guage, and called him offensive names; two still severer measures. The citizens of days later, in a public place, he struck at him Hamburg sent a most abject apology to with a cane. He was convicted; and sub sequently President Washington informed Napoleon, describing their utter helpless ness and the ruin that must have befallen the judges that the minister of France de their town if they had resisted. Their manded that Monsieur de Longchamps, deputies, however, were received with the having appeared in the uniform of a French most bitter reproaches; they were told that officer, should be delivered up to France. they had committed a breach of the laws of To this the judges answered that he could hospitality " which would not have taken not lawfully be surrendered. The most important question of extra place among the barbarian hordes of the desert," and an act which would be their dition between the United States and Great Britain arose in the case of Charles Laurence "eternal reproach." In no country, perhaps, does the question in 1876, the point at issue being whether a of extradition take such an important place person extradited for one crime could, after as in our own. At the formation of the being tried and acquitted, be put on trial Union, the question of the surrender of for another offense — an offense uncon criminals who fled from one State to another nected with the one for which he was was one of the difficulties with which the. surrendered — without being afforded the founders of the Republic had to deal. The opportunity of returning to the country by proximity of Canada brought the question which his surrender was granted. Laurence