Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 07.djvu/438

EXTRACT. Evaporation in vacuo is found to be a great im- provement, as it may be effected at relatively low temperatures.

EXTRACT OF MEAT. An extract obtained by treating chopped meat with cold water, then very gradually raising the temperature, when about one-eighth of the weight of the meat is dissolved, leaving an almost tasteless insoluble fibrine. ( See Beef Tea ; Broth. ) It may be concentrated into small bulk, and, when desired, may be afterwards treated with water, and being heated, forms an agreeable, light, and nutritive soup. The market is supplied with many brands of concentrated beef extract, prepared by special patented processes. The pioneer in this work was the chemist Liebig. See Meat Extract; Food, Preservation of.

EXTRA CURRENT. See Electricity.

EXTRADITION (from Lat. ex, out + tradi- tiu, delivery, from tradere, to give over). The delivery up by one State or nation to another of a fugitive from justice. Strictly speaking, extra- dition is a modern practice, although Hannibal's delivery was stipulated for in a Roman treaty. and more than once Roman citizens were sur- rendered to a foreign power. These acts, like many others in ancient, mediaeval, and early modern times, were confined to those who were considered enemies of the State. The right to deny the privilege of asylum was a prerogative of the sovereign, and sovereigns frequently used it so as best to secure their personal interests. Tims extradition was confined to what we should now call political offenses.

It is mainly within the last hundred years that a deeper international comity has developed. Increased intercourse and modern means of trans- portation have greatly facilitated flights from justice, while a sense of common interest has done much to diminish international jealousy and distrust. Each decade it has become more evident that the failure of civil justice in one country is likely to result unfavorably to its neighbor. Xo country has ever willingly received the convicts ul another, and it was possible that nations with liberal ideas should long fail to perceive that there was no great, difference between encourag- ing crime and furnishing an asylum for fugitives from justice. If. then, there was a common national interest in the punishment of criminals, and if offenders against foreigi laws were unde- sirable immigrants, extradition was both an "I antage and a doty.

The great writers on international law have in. i been in harmony on the question as to whether extradition is, in the absence of a incut, a matter oi international obligation. Some of the ablest have argued in the affirmative, hut the modern writers, like Bluntschli, Fiore, Phil- limore, Woolsey, Ball, and Moore, who liave so successfully labored to place the la'w of nations on a sound legal basis are agreed thai the obligation is a purelj mora I one. Bui thi iraci ice i genet allj recognized, as is the principle that, owing to the grea1 differenci he I'i'lit iia I 33 stems and pena I codes oi different nations, it was better for them to" ir mutual obi igal tons iii this respet 1 1 larke, the lead i 1 adit ion, state- 1 hat it- I England begins with the Ashburton Treaty of 1842 with the United States. Except- ing the Jay Treaty of 1794, which contained an article on extradition limited to twelve years, all the other treaties covering this subject made by the United States are of a subsequent date. The two conventions between the United Sta and Great Britain, in 1842 and 1890, show what offenses two leading nations of to-day consider extraditable. The former covered the crimes ol murder, assault with intent to commit murder, piracy, arson, robbery, forgery, and the utterance of forged papers; the latter added voluntary manslaughter, counterfeiting, or altering mom etc., embezzlement, larceny, etc., fraud by a bailee, banker, etc-., perjury or subornation of perjury, rape, abduction, child-stealing, kidnap- ing, burglary, etc., piracy by the law of nations, revolt, or conspiracy to revolt by two or more persons on board a ship on the high seas, etc., crimes and offenses against the laws of both countries for the suppression of slavery and slave-trading.

The tendency is to enlarge the list of extradit- able crimes, but there are many offenses which, for obvious reasons, cannot properly be included. Such are political crimes and offenses against religion and marriage laws. As the customs laws of each nation are leveled against the interests of all others, it would be absurd to add offenses against them to the number of extraditable crimes. The general rule is that an extraditable crime must be one commonly recognized by civ- ilized nations as a malum in se, and not merely malum prohibitum. The method and prerequisites of extradition may. perhaps, best be shown by a quotation from the Ashburton Treaty. It provides that the two Powers shall, upon mutual requisitions, deliver up to justice all persons charged with the com- mission of certain crimes, "provided that this shall only be done upon such evidence of crim- inality as, according to the laws of the place where the fugitive or peTson so charged shall be found, would justify his apprehension and com- mitment for trial if the crime or offense had there been committed; and the respective judges and other magistrates of the two governments shall have power, jurisdiction, and authority. upon complaint made under oath, to issue a war- rant for the apprehension of the fugitive or per- son so charged, that he may be brought before such judges or cither magistrates respectively, to the end that the evidence of such criminality shall be heard and considered : and if. on such bearing, the evidence be declined sufficient to bus tain the charge, it shall be the duty of the examining judge or magistrate to certify the same to the proper executive authority, that a warrant may issue for the surrender of such fu- gitive." The complaint under oath is commonly . bj a consular officer of the stale asking for extradition. If all the proceedings are satisfac- tory, iln President of the United States (in ..ur practice) causes the surrender to be made to the agent of the demanding Power. The expenses are borne 1> the party making the requisition.

Then limitations on the practice of extradition which are worthy of notice. (1) It is an almost universal rule I hat a State will nni surrender its own citizens to a foreign Power. This is due to the national sentiment that leads