No. 301.
Mr. Hoppin
to Mr. Evarts.
Legation of
the United States,
London, December 27, 1879.
(Received January 12.)
No. 128.]
Sir: Referring to Mr. Welsh’s No. 327, of the 29th
July last, and to instruction No. 371 of the 15th of September last, upon
the method of settling international accounts of extradition expenses, I
have the honor to inclose a copy of the correspondence which has taken place
upon this subject since the last-mentioned date, between this legation and
the foreign office.
I have, &c.,
[Page 473]
[Inclosure 1 in No. 128.]
Mr. Hoppin to the
Marquis of Salisbury.
Legation of the United States,
London, October 3,
1879.
My Lord: Referring to your lordship’s note of
the 23d of July to Mr. Welsh, in which it is proposed that the
Government of the United States shall enter into an arrangement with
that of Great Britain, by which an account Shall he rendered, and
payment made, of expenses incurred in connection with cases of
extradition, once annually, at the most convenient period of the
financial year, I have the honor to state that Mr. Welsh sent a copy of
your lordship’s note to Mr. Evarts immediately after it was received,
and that I have now in hand the reply of the Department of State to the
proposition in question, which I am instructed to communicate to your
lordship.
The treaty of 1842, Article X, provides that “The expense of such
apprehension and delivery shall he borne and defrayed by the party who
makes the requisition and receives the’ fugitive.” The statutory
provisions in regard to extradition are silent on the question of
expenses. No legal objections are perceived to entering into such an
arrangement as that proposed by your lordship.
An inconvenience, however, might arise from such an arrangement as the
result of the following circumstances. There are very few requisitions
for offenses against the Federal laws. Each State and Territory is
required to bear the expenses of requisition and extradition in each
case presented by it for the extradition of fugitive criminals from the
justice of such State or Territory:
The expenses which the Government of the United States would be called
upon by Great Britain to pay are such as are usually incurred about
Scotland Yard, such as services of detectives, the expenses of keeping
prisoners, &c.
These expenses the agent appointed by the President, on the nomination of
the executive of the State, is expected to pay at the time of taking
charge of the fugitive.
If in any case they should be left unpaid, as in some few cases they have
been, the Department of State might be called upon to audit and pay a
considerable sum at the end of the year without any fund under its
control from which it could properly pay, and might, moreover, find it
difficult to get reimbursement from the State. As the matter is now,
each case can be scrutinized on its own merits and at the moment.
In view of these circumstances, the Department of State does not consider
it expedient to enter into the arrangement proposed in your lordship’s
note of the 23d of July last.
I have, &c.,
[Inclosure 2 in No. 128.]
The Marquis of Salisbury
to Mr. Hoppin.
Foreign
Office, December 23,
1879.
Sir: With reference to my note of the 23d of
July last, relative to the mode of payment of certain small claims
arising in connection with cases of extradition, I have the honor to
state to you that having now received replies from various governments
to which I had addressed a similar communication, it appears that a
considerable divergence of opinion exists as to the most convenient mode
of effecting such payments.
Under the circumstances it appears to me that it will be most expedient
to adhere to the plan hitherto pursued in this respect, namely, that
each claim arising on a case of extradition should be preferred
separately, and I have, therefore, the honor to request you to invite
your government to accede to such an arrangement.
I have, &c.,
[Inclosure 3 in No. 128.]
Mr. Hoppin to the
Marquis of Salisbury.
Legation of the United States,
London, December 27,
1879.
My Lord: I have the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of your lordship’s note of the 23d instant, upon the subject of
the payment of the expenses in extradition cases,
[Page 474]
and expressing your lordship’s opinion
that it will he more convenient to adhere to the plan hitherto pursued,
that is to say, that each claim arising on a case of extradition should
he preferred separately.
I beg to say that I shall fulfill your lordship’s request to invite my
government to accede to this arrangement, which, I may be permitted to
state, it has already virtually done, as will appear from my letter to
your lordship of the 3d of October last.
I have, &c.,
