|
|
him up to the offended state, to be there brought to
justice. "
This is pretty generally observed with respect to great
crimes which are contrary to the laws and safety of all
nations. Assassins, murderers and robbers are seized every
where, at the desire of the sovereign in whose territories
the crime was committed, and are delivered up to his jus-
tice. The mutter is carried still further in States that are
more closely connected, by friendship and good neighborhood.
Even in cases of ordinary transgression, which are only sub-
jects of civil prosecution, either with a view to the recovery of
damages, or the infliction of a slight punishment, the sub-
jects of two neighboring States are reciprocally obliged to
appear before the magistrate of the place where they are
accused of having failed in their duty. It belongs not to
the sovereign of the accused to examine whether the accu-
sation be true or false. He is to presume on the justice of
his neighbor, and not suffer any doubts on his part to
impair an institution so well calculated to preserve harmo-
ny and good understanding between the States. " — Vattel's
Law of Nations, book second, chapter six.
Your committee will not enquire whether the principle
of demand and surrender is confined to henious crimes, such
as assassination and murder; because, whatever the rule
under the law of nations may be, it is virtually abrogated
by the practice among the States in this Union. They
have uniformly demanded fugitives from justice, and these
demands have not been disregarded in offences of a less
grade. Even the rigor of the rule has been relaxed by the
demand of New York herself for the surrender of a fugi-
tive, accused of forgery, and it does not appear that the
particular act charged against the party, rendered that for-
gery "a crime equally contrary to the laws and safety of
all nations. " For aught that is known, it was an offence
against the laws of New York alone.
These demands are gratified on the principle that crime
must be punished for the good of society. According to
the authority quoted, the nation of which the offender is a
citizen, must punish him, or deliver him up to the justice
of the offended State. In this country crimes must be
tried and punished where they are committed. This right
is secured to the accused by the constitution. New York,
in the present case, cannot inflict punishment under the
law of nations, because our constitution forbids it. It
would seem strange, then, that an offender may escape
even a trial, by means of the very provision that was de-
|
|
|
