Mr. Clayton to Mr. Hay.
Mexico, November 18, 1903.
Sir: Referring to Department’s instruction No. 985, of the 3d instant, I have the honor to report that on the 14th instant I delivered in person to Mr. Algara the requisition for the surrender of Charles Kratz, with accompanying papers.
Upon reading the requisition, Mr. Algara seemed to be somewhat uncertain as to the sufficiency of the language used in the promise of reciprocity, suggesting that the promise, perhaps, should be “strict reciprocity in any similar case,” omitting the words “bribery committed in Mexico prior to the date of the supplemental convention between the two countries.” He was not, however, insistent. The next day (Sunday) I called upon him again and remarked that if there was any doubt as to the sufficiency of the language submitted by me, I preferred that he would withhold the requisition until I could communicate with the Department and obtain its permission to use language that would be satisfactory to him. He replied he thought the language was sufficient, but that he would see the President the next day, and after receiving his views would inform me. I called at the foreign office on Monday and was pleased to learn that the language was deemed sufficient, and that the papers would be sent at once to the district judge at Guadalajara.
During this latter interview, Mr. Algara expressed some discontent at the action of Mr. Desmond, who bears the President’s warrant, in calling upon President Díaz in relation to the extradition, and at certain newspaper interviews. He said that it would be better if Mr. Desmond would return to the United States and await the action of the authorities, which he said might cover a period of four months before a final conclusion is reached. I expressed surprise at the length of time he seemed to think the proceedings may require, and said that I hoped his department would expedite them as rapidly as consistent.
I inclose herewith a copy of the requisition.
In connection with this case, I also respectfully acknowledge the receipt of your instruction No. 988, of the 6th instant, and inclosure. Mr. Algara having expressed a desire to be furnished with a copy of the decision upon which the Department bases its views as to the retroactive effect of the extradition treaty between the two countries (see inclosure 4, dispatch No. 1996), I have transmitted to him with my note of to-day—copy inclosed—a copy of the opinion of the district court of the United States for the southern district of New York (Blatchford J.) in the case of In re De Giacomo (12 Blatchford, 391).
I have, etc.,