No. 131.
Mr. Fish to Mr. Hoffman.
Washington, May 24, 1876.
Sir: Since instruction No. 887, dated the 22d instant, was prepared. I have received your No. 82, under date of the 11th instant, inclosing copies of two notes addressed to you by Lord Derby on the subject of the extradition of Winslow, bearing date, respectively, the 5th and 6th instant.
In the former of these notes Lord Derby informs you that a copy of instruction of March 31, which had been transmitted to him by you on April 29, had been communicated to Her Majesty’s secretary of state for the home department, who had requested him to call your attention to the part which alludes to Lawrence’s case, and which states that, although not arraigned on any other indictment than for the forgery for which he was extradited, the British home, office has raised the question that he may be possibly tried for other charges and for other crimes, and states that the home secretary wishes to observe that no question was raised by him until he was satisfied that Lawrence had been indicted, although not yet arraigned, for smuggling.
An indictment was found against Lawrence for smuggling, February 3, 1875, a month before any steps had been taken toward his extradition or any demand made therefor.
The indictment had been found some time before he departed for Great Britain; his extradition was not asked therefor, nor was the charge proved against him in the proceedings in London, and he has not been arraigned upon it in this country.
The United States has stated what is claimed to be the practice and the right of this Government under the extradition treaty but has not [Page 245] stated its intentions as to the trial of Lawrence, nor has Her Majesty’s government, so far as I am aware, any evidence to justify any conclusion on that point.
Lord Derby, in his subsequent note of the 6th of May, informs you, in reply to your note transmitting references to certain late decisions in the supreme court of Canada, not in harmony with the position assumed in the case of Winslow, that the home secretary has informed him that he differs from the Canadian judges, and calls attention to the case of the Lennie mutineers, heard on May 5, in London.
This case, as I apprehend, would be governed by the French treaty made under the law of 1870, and by that act, and, if so, would be in no way applicable to the present discussion.
You will furnish Lord Derby with a copy of this instruction.
I am, &c.,