In cases determined by existing Treaties
2. In the absence of Treaties, in cases when extradition is proper, according to the principle of reciprocity, or the usual practice of nations.
Mr. Satow to the Earl of Rosebery. — (Received April 8.) (Télégraphie.) Monte Video, April 8, 1893.
If Balfour should corne to Monte Video he will be apprehended. Nouv. Recueil Gén. 2e. S. XX. Q
Grande-Bretagne, Argentine.
No. 9.
Mr. Pakenham to the Earl of Rosebery. — (Received April 11.) (Télégraphie.) Buenos Ayres, April 11, 1893.
I Have the honour to state, with référence to your Lordship's telegram of the 3rd April, that Jabez S. Balfour is here, but that to get him properly watched is a very difficult matter. At présent he is believed to be residing outside the town. I will immediately telegraph to Her Majesty's Minister at Monte Video in case Balfour should attempt to leave the Argentine Republic, with the view that he may be arrested if he should go to Uruguay.
No. 10.
The Earl of Rosebery to Mr. Satow.
(Télégraphie.) Foreign Office, April 25, 1893, 4. 15, P. M.
Your telegram of the 8th instant.
Newspapers report Mr. Balfour in Monte Video yesterday.
No. 11.
Home Office to Foreign Office. — (Received May 2.) Sir, Whitehall, May 1, 1893.
With référence to the Home Office letter of the 27th February last in the case of the fugitive offender Dr. Richard Thomas Freeman , I am directed by the Secretary of State to acquaint you , for the information of the Earl of Rosebery , that Freeman is supposed to be practising in one of the large towns of the Argentine Republic as a doctor or dentist, or as an assistant to doctors or dentists in the administration of anaesthetics; and to request that you will be so good as to move his Lordship to cause the inclosed woodeuts and descriptions of the fugitive to be forwarded to Her Majesty's Minister at Buenos Ayres , with a view to his applying for Freeman's arrest in the event of the ratification of the Extradition Treaty with the Government of the Republic.
I am, &c.
(Signed) Godfrey Lushington.
No. 12.
The Earl of Rosebery to Mr. Pakenham.
Sir, Foreign Office , May 9 , 1893.
With référence to my despatch of the 2nd March last*), I transmit to you herewith , for your information and guidance , a copy of a further letter from the Home Office respecting Dr. R. T. Freeman.**)
I am, &c.
(Signed) Rosebery.
*) Despatch sending copy of No. 3.
**) No. 10.
Extradition de Jabez Spencer Balfour.
No. 13.
Sir, Foreign Office, May 9, 1893.
I transmit to you herewith the Queen's ratification of the Treaty between Great Britain and the Argentine Republic for the Extradition cf Criminals , signed at Buenos Ayres the 22nd May , 1889.
As soon as the Treaty , as amended by the Protocol of the 12th December, 1890, has received the approval of the Argentine Congress, you are authorized to exchange Her Majesty's ratification against a similar instrument on the part of the Président of the Argentine Republic.
I am, &c.
(Signed) Rosebery.
No. 14.
Foreign Office to Home Office.
Sir, Foreign Office, May 9, 1893.
I am directed by the Earl of Rosebery to state, for the information of Mr. Secretary Asquith , that a copy of your letter of the lst instant respecting Dr. R. T. Freeman has been sent to Her Majesty's Minister at Buenos Ayres.
Her Majesty's ratification of the Treaty between Great Britain and the Argentine Republic of the 22nd May , 1889 , has been sent to Mr. Pakenham , in order that he may be in a position to proceed to the exchange of ratifications if the Treaty should be approved by the Argentine Congress.
I am, &c.
(Signed) T. H. Sanderson.
No. 15.
Mr. Satow to the Earl of Rosebery. — (Received May 20.) My Lord, Monte Video, April 25 , 1893.
With référence to your Lordship's telegrams of the 3rd instant, I bave the honour to report that I lost no time in addressing a note to the Uruguay an Minister for foreign Affairs, asking for the provisional arrest of Mr. J. S. Balfour in the event of his coming to Monte Video to meet Mr. Daniel Hill. Orders were thereupon given by the Government to the police authorities to act accordingly.
I also communicated with Mr. Pakenham, who gave instructions that I should be informed , by telegraph , if Mr. Balfour embarked for Monte Video. Although newspapers have given currency to a report that he had been here, I do not think there was any foundation for it.
On the arrivai of the »Sorata« here on the 22nd instant, a police agent was set to watch Mr. Hill's movements, and it was ascertained that he proceeded to Buenos Ayres by river steamer that evening.
I have informed Mr. Pakenham.
(Signed) Ernest Satow.
Grande-Bretagne, Argentine.
No. 16.
Mr. Satow to the Earl of Rosebery. — (Received May 20.) My Lord, Monte Video, April 28, 1893.
With référence to your Lordship's telegram of the 25th instant , informing me that the newspapers reported Mr. J. S. Balfour as having been in Monte Video on the previous day, I be to state that there seems to be no ground for the statement. As far as this place is concerned, the matter is in the hands of the very efficient Head of the Secret Police, Colonel Quijano, who is certain that Mr. Balfour has not been here. Mr. Pakenham, with whom I have communicated, is also of the same opinion.
The fact is , the press , both native and foreign , at Buenos Ayres as well as at Monte Video, have busied themselves in giving every possible information to the public about the measures taken for obtaining Mr. Balfour's extradition, and he has been made aware by them that while there is no Treaty with the Argentine Republic under which his extradition can be asked for, he would encouuter the certain risk of arrest if he ventured to Monte Video.
I have, &c.
(Signed) Ernest Satow.
No. 17.
Mr. Satow to the Earl of Rosebery. — (Received June 2.) My Lord, Monte Video, May 12, 1893.
I have the honour to forward copy and translations of a note received from the Uruguayan Minister for Foreign Affairs, inclosing a Report from the Chief of the Détective Police on the steps taken by him for insuring the arrest of Mr. J. S. Balfour, in case he should corne to Monte Video to meet Mr. Daniel Hill, a passenger by the Pacific mail-steamer »Sorata.«
As I reported in my despatch of the 25th April, Mr. Hill proceeded to Buenos Ayres on the day of his arrivai here , and there is no reason to believe that Mr. Balfour has been in Monte Video at ail.
I have, &c.
(Signed) Ernest Satow.
Inclosure 1 in No. 17.
Dr. Herrero y Espinosa to Mr. Satow.
(Translation.) Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Monte Video,
M. le Ministre, May 8, 1893.
I have the honour to transmit to your Excellency a certified copy of the Report transmitted by the Préfecture of the capital relative to the measures taken to effect the capture of the British subject , J. Spencer Balfour, which it has not been possible to accomplish, owing to the said person not having, as was expected, corne over from Buenos Ayres.
I take, &c.
(Signed) Manuel Herrero y Espinosa.
Extradition de Jabez Spencer Balfour.
Inclosure 2 in No. 17.
Report of Chief of Détective Police.
(Translation.)
Department of Police of the Capital.
To the Most Excellent the Minister of Foreign Relations, Dr. Manuel Herrero y Espinosa.
Most Excellent Sir,
I Have the honour to transcribe for your Excellency the Report of the Chief of the Détective Police, with référence to the capture of the British subject, J. Spencer Balfour, which is as follows: —
» Report No. 13.
>Sir, »Monte Video, May 4, 1893.
»In compliance with your request, and what was laid down in the letter of the Ministry of Foreign Relations which I have before me, the Undersigned proceeds to report that when the proper moment came he took the necessary measures to watch for the arrivai of the British subject, J. Spencer Balfour, accused of fraud committed in England, and who the Légation of Her Britannic Majesty suppoaed would arrive in this capital on the 23rd April, proceeding from Buenos Ayres with the object of meeting a passenger named Daniel Hill , who was to arrive from England in the steamer 'Sorata/ which it was known for certain would anchor in the port on that date. The resuit of this commission, Sir, was that it was ascertained that the said Balfour did not corne to Monte Video, and it only happened that Daniel Hill, perhaps fôr that reason, embarked for Buenos Ayres on board the steamer 'Minerva.' This having been observed an employé was sent on his track, who found out and reported that Hill had taken rooms at the Grand Hôtel in that city, and that Spencer did not go to see him there, although it is quite certain that he is at Buenos Ayres.
»This is ail I have to report to you, Sir, as the resuit of the commission that was instrusted to me.
»God guard you many years,
(Signed) >F. Quijano*.
God guard your Excellency many years,
(Signed) Eugenio C. Abella.
Monte Video, May 5, 1893.
Grande - Bretagne , Argentine.
Appendix.
No. 1.
Home Office to Foreign Office. — (Received September 13.) Sir, Whitehall, September 13, 1890.
I am directed by the Secretary of State to transmit herewith a copy of a letter from the Chief Constable of Manchester and the accompanying copy of dépositions and warrant issued for the arrest of James Coupe , who is charged with forgery and embezzlement , and has fled to Buenos Ayres.*)
I am to request that you will be so good as to lay the same before the Marquis of Salisbury, and . move his Lordship to consider whetber this is a case where Her MajestyV Représentative should be instructed to inquire whether the Government of the Argentine Republic would be disposed to surrender the prisoner as an act of international comity in anticipation of the ratification of the Extradition Treaty.
I am, &c.
(Signed) E. Leigh Pemberton.
No. 2.
The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Bland.
Sir, Foreign Office, September 16, 1890.
I Transmit to you a copy of a letter from the Home Office of the 13th instant,**) transmitting a copy of the dépositions and of the warrant for the arrest of James Coupe, who is charged with forgery and embezzlement, and has fled to Buenos Ayres.
I have to request that you will inquire whether the Argentine Government will consent to Coupe's arrest and surrender to this country.
You will explain, if necessary, that the existing Law in this country upon extradition does not enable the Executive to grant the surrender of a fugitive criminal, who has taken refuge in the United Kingdom, to any country with which Great Britain has not concluded a Treaty in accordance with the provisions of the Extradition Act of 1870.
Her Majesty's Government are, therefore, not in a position to promise reciprocity , and can only ask for Coupe's surrender as an act of international comity, pending, they hope, the uear exchange of the ratifications of the Extradition Treaty already signed between Great Britain and the Argentine Republic.
I am, &c.
(Signed) Salisbury.
*) Not printed.
**) No. 1.
Extradition de Jabez Spencer Balfour.
No. 3.
Mr. Pakenham to the Marquis of Salisbury. — (Received October 29.) (Télégraphie.) Buenos Ayres, October 29, 1890.
With référence to your Lordship's despatsch of the 19th ultimo the Argentine Government have refused to grant Coupe's extradition, absence of reciprocity being the principal reason alleged.
No. 4.
Home Office to Foreign Office. — (Received November 3.) Sir, Whitehall, November 1, 1890.
With référence to your letter of the 30th ultimo, stating that the Argentine Government have refused to surrender the fugitive, James Coupe, I am directed by the Secretary of State to suggest , for Lord Salisbury's considération that Her Majesty's Minister at Buenos Ayres be instructed to take the earliest opportunity of urging the Argentine Governmenet to complète the Extradition Treaty, only one point in which now remainsopen.
Inquiries have recently been made at this Office about another case in which a person, believed to be guilty of serious crime, has taken refuge in the Argentine Republic.
I am, &c. (Signed) Godfrey Lushmgton.
No. 5.
Home Office to Foreign Office. — (Received November 4.) Sir, Whitehall, November 3, 1890.
I Am directed by the Secretary of State to transmit to you , to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury , the inclosed copy of a letter from Messrs. Bateson, Warr, and Bateson with regard to the case of John Shaw Bradbury, who is charged with the crime of fraud by a trustée, the moneys misappropriated amounting to 40,000?., and who is supposed to be now in the Argentine Republic.*) The Secretary of State l'ears that, in view of the récent refusai of the Argentine Government to take action in another case, it is useless to apply for this man's surrender ; but he thinks that if Lord Salisbury sees no objection, some communication should be made with regard to the case , as showing the importance of speedily concluding the Extradition Treaty with the Argentine Republic.
The copies of the warrant and dépositions are inclosed ; but , if it is thought désirable to send them to Buenos Ayres, theys hould first be returned with a view to their being properly authenticated by the Magistrate and in this Department. I am, &c.
(Signed) Godfrey Lushington,
*) Not printed.
248 Grande-Bretagne, Argentine»
No. 6.
Home Office to Foreign Office. — (Received November 10.) Sir, Whitehall, November 8, 1890.
With référence to your letter of the 30th ultimo regarding the case of James Coupe, a fugitive criminal now supposed to be in the Argentine Eepublic, I am directed by the Secretary of State to transmit to you the inclosed letter from the Chief Constable of Manchester with regard to this case,*) and I am to inquire what reply the Marquis of Salisbury would wish to be sent to Mr. Wood's letter.
I am, &c.
(Signed) E. Leigh Pemberton.
No. 7.
Foreign Office to Home Office.
Sir, Foreign Office, November 11, 1890.
In returning to you the documents contained in your letter of the 3rd instant,**) I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to state to you, for the information of Mr. Secretary Matthews, that in view of the telegram received from Mr. Pakenham in Coupe's case, it would appear to be useless to make a request for the extradition of J. S. Bradbury from the Argentine Republic.
In connection with this case, and with référence to your letter of the lst instant, I am to inclose a copy of a despatch which his Lordship has addressed to Her Majesty's Minister at Buenos Ayres on the subject of extradition.***)
I am, &c.
(Signed) T. H. Sanderson.
No. 8.
The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Pakenham. Sir, Foreign Office, November 11, 1890.
I Have received your telegram of the 29th ultimo, in which you report that the Argentine Government have refused to surrender the fugitive, James Coupe, on the ground of the absence of reciprocity in this country.
Her Majesty's Government greatly regret this décision in the interests of justice, but are unable to press the request, as, in view of the provisions of existing English law, they cannot engage to surrender any fugitive from a country between which and Great Britain no Extradition Treaty has been concluded and put into opération. They had hoped that the Government of the Argentine Republic would have accepted the negotiations so nearly cmopleted for an Extradition Treaty between the two countries, as évidence of the désire of Her Majesty's Government to afford
*) Not printed.
***) No. 9.
Extradition de Jabez Spencer Balfour.
to the Argentine Government ail proper reciprocal facilities in regard to extradition, under the conditions which alone are possible in this country, viz., in conformity with the express stipulations of a eornpleted Treaty.
Fresh évidence of the urgent necessity for a Treaty is offorded by a further application just received for the extradition of another criminal charged with fraud to the extent of 40,000?., who has also taken refuge in the Argentine Republic, but for whose extradition Her Majesty's Government are not able to make a request, under existing conditions.
I have to request that you will speak in this sensé to the Minister for Foreign Afifairs, and that you will urge him to expedite, by ail means in his power, the conclusion of the Extradition Treaty between Great Britain and the Argentine Republic, which would put an end to the existing unsatisfactory state of the question.
I am, &c.
(Signed) Salisbury.
No. 9.
Foreign Office to Home Office.
Sir, Foreign Office, November 14, 1890.
In reply to your letter of the 8th instant,*) inclosing a letter from the Chief Constable of Manchester respecting the case of James Coupe, I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to request that you will inform Mr. Secretary Matthews that, in his Lordship's opinion, it would not be proper to make any further application to the Argentine Government for Coupe's extradition. The Argentine Government has refused to surrender Coupe to this country on a légitime ground, viz., absence of reciprocity, and Lord Salisbury fears that if he were to press the matter further it might lead to undesirable correspondence, and perhaps delay the conclusion of the Treaty.
A copy of a despatch to Her Majesty's Minister at Buenos Ayres on the subject of the proposed Extradition Treaty with the Argentine Republic was sent to your Department, for Mr. Matthews' information, on the llth instant, and Lord Salisbury thinks that no further instructions in the matter need be sent until the reply of the Argentine Government is received.
The inclosures to your letter are herewith returned.
I am, &c.
(Signed) T. H. Sanderson.
No. 10.
Mr. Pakenham to the Marquis of Salisbury. — (Received December 4.) My Lord, Buenos Ayres, November 3, 1890.
In référence to the contents of my telegram of the 29th ultimo , re-
*) No. 6.
Grande-Bretagne, Argentine.
porting that the Argentine Government refused to grant the arrest and extradition of James Coupe, a forger, I think it well to lay ail the circumstances of the matter before your Lordship without delay.
As reported in my telegrams of the 17th and 23rd September, 1889, the then Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr. Zeballos, agreed to making the verbal altération, as requested, in Article V of the Extradition Convention of the 22nd May, 1889, but said he must first have the sanction of the Législature to the proceeding, which he would lay before them without delay. Time went on, and nothing was done, though I mentioned the affair more than once to the Minister, who declared that it was now before the Chamber, and would take its turn in the natural course of business. A sudden change in the political world caused the retirement of Dr. Zeballos, to be succeded, for a few days only, by Senor Alcorta, who in his turn gave place to Senor Roque Saentz Pena, who entered on office during my absence in Paraguay,- to leave it prior to my return, and whom it has not been my good fortune ever yet to meet.
On my return from Paraguay towards the end of August I found Dr. Eduardo Costa installed as Minister for Foreign Affairs, and I lost no time in holding a conversation with him upon the subject of the proposed altération in Article V of the Convention among other matters. He was not unfavourably disposed in this direction, but requested me to bring the paper with me on the occasion of my next visit for his more perfect information. In two days I called again, with the paper containing the précise wording of the proposed altération, and was exceedingly surprised at being informed by Dr. Costa that he feard it would be not onlv unconstitutional, but plainy contrary to Argentine law and practice.
An adverse opinion from Dr. Costa is a very formidable thing in this country, as he bears, and I believe deservedly so , a very high , personal character, besides being regarded as possessed of légal attainments of the highest order, having, in fact, acted as Attorney -General during several years. Under the immédiate circumstances, however, I contented myself with endeavouring to set forth your Lordship's views verbally, and promised to send him a written communication on the subject, which I accordingly did on the 26th August last, and placed in his hands, for the second time, the inclosure in your Lordship's despatch above mentioned.
Copy of my note is herewith inclosed. No reply reached me , and I did not press very warmly for its receipt, though I made occasional verbal mention of it from time to time to the Under-Secretary of State and gentlemen of the Department, the Minister himself being confined to his bed by illness.
On the 16th ultimo I had the honour of receiving your Lordship's despatch of the 16th September, instructing me to endeavour to obtain the arrest and extradition of the forger, James Coupe. I at once took the papers to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs for the examination of Dr. Costa, but he was still in bed, and I was therefore obliged to forward them in an officiai note, whereof copy is annexed, to which I received the reply, copy and translation of which are likewise inclosed.
Extradition de Jabez Spencer Balfour.
On the 31st October I went to see the Minister, when he informed me that he now had no objection to make the proposed altération in Article V of the Convention, but that it must be submitted for the sanction of Congress, which unfortunately is now in recess, until, I believe, March next. He also said that neither Dr. Zeballos, nor any one else, had sent to Congress the subject of the proposed altération , and he could find no trace of it. In order to guard against a possible récurrence of this inadvertence, I shall address to his Excellency a formai note on the subject, and request a written reply.
Meanwhile , Coupe is at large , and , I présume , will remain so till March next, when I trust that means may be found for causing his arrest and transmission to England, should your Lordship be of opinion that another application to that effect would be advisable.
I have &c.
(Signed) F. Pakenham.
P. S. — I inclose copy of the note which I have this day addressed to Dr. Costa in référence to the early présentation of this matter by his Excellency for the considération of Congress at its next Session.
Inclosure 1 in No. 10.
Mr. Pakenham to Sefîor Costa.
M. le Ministre, Buenos Ayres, October 17, 1890.
In compliance with instructions received from the Marquis of Salisbury, I have the honour to transmit to your Excellency herewith copy of a letter addressed to the Home Department of Her Majesty's Government by the Chief Constable of Manchester, together with duly certifîed copies of the dépositions and warrant issued for the arrest of James Coupe, who is charged with forgery and embezzlement , and is believed to be at the présent moment at Buenos Ayres under the name of William Bennet, his letters being addressed to that name at 1929, Casilla de Correo, Buenos Ayres.
In forwarding to your Excellency the above- mentioned documents, I am directed to inquire whether the Argentine Government will consent to Coupe's arrest and surrender to Her Majesty's Government. I am at the same time to explain that the existing law in the United Kingdom upon extradition does not enable the Executive to grant the surrender of a fugitive criminal who has taken refuge there to any country with which Great Britain has not concluded a Treaty in accordance with the provisions of the Extradition Act of 1870.
Her Majesty's Government are therefore not in a position to promise reciprocity, and can only ask for Coupe's surrender as an act of international comity, pending, they hope, the near exchange of the ratifications of the Extradition Treaty already signed between Great Britain and the Argentine Republic. I avail, &c.
(Signed) F. Pakenham.
Grande-Bretagne, Argentine.
Inclosure 2 in No. 10.
Senor Costa to Mr. Pakenham.
(Translation.) Buenos Ayres, October 24, 1890.
I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of the notes which your Excellency was pleased to address to me on the 17th and 20th instant relating to the extradition of the British subject, James Coupe, accused of forgery and embezzlement
In accordance with the reasons set forth in the opinion given by the Attorney-Général of the nation, a copy of which is înclosed, my Government does not find itself in a position to grant the extradition of the said individual, as your Excellency will learn from the décision which I textually transmit to you.
I beg also to return the documents which your Excellency was good enough to send me in order to support the application in question. I reiterate to your Excellency, &c.
(Signed) Eduardo Costa.
Inclosure 3 in No. 10.
Opinion of Argentine Attorney-Général as to the Surrender of James Coupe to the British Government, and the Décision founded thereon.
(Translation.)
Excelentissimo Senor.
The Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in applying to your Excellency for the extradition of James Coupe, accused of forgery and embezzlement, states that »the law at présent in force in the United Kingdom with respect to extradition does not enable the Executive to grant the surrender of a fugitive criminal, who has taken refuge there, to any country with which Great Britain has not concluded a Treaty in accordance with the provisions of the Extradition Act of 1870.«
The Minister adds that »Her Majesty's Government is not in a position to promise reciprocity, and can only request the surrender of Coupe as an act of international comity, pending, as the said Government expresses it, the early exchange of the ratifications of the Extradition Treaty already signed between Great Britain and the Argentine Republic. «
In view of thèse déclarations of his Excellency the Minister of Great Britain , the dispositions of our laws and the jurisprudence established by the National Suprême Court of Justice, my opinion is that your Excellency cannot accède to the request for extradition which has been addressed to you.
The English Minister déclares to your Excellency at once that he cannot offer reciprocity, while at the same time it is clear from his own communication that there does not yet exist a Treaty which renders obligatory for both countries the granting of extradition of the criminals or accused persons in the one country who may have taken refuge in the other.
Extradition de Jabez Spencer Bal four.
We must therefore décide upon the case according to the ternis of our législation.
The Law of Extradition of the 25th August, 1885, lays down in its first Article that »The Government of the Argentine Republic may surrender to foreign Governments, on the condition of reciprocity, any fugitive person accused or condemned by the Tribunals of the Power applying for it, always provided that it is for a crime or offence among those specified in the présent Law, and in conformity with the régulations established therein.*
Subsequently to this Law, there has been passed that of October 1888, which ordered the observance as a Law of the nation of the Code of Procédure in pénal niatters uow in force, and which, as being of a later date than the above- mentioned Law of 1885, annuls the latter in every respect in which its dispositions are not entirely in conformity.
The above - mentioned Code of Procédure, Articles 646 to 676, are devoted to the Rules to be observed in cases of extradition ; and the first of them establishes that, »The extradition of criminals, whether it be applied for by the Republic or be granted by it at the request of another nation, can only be carried out: —
>1. In the cases which are determined by existing Treaties.
»2. In default of Treaties, in cases in which the extradition is carried out upon the basis of reciprocity or the uniform practice of nations.*
If there is not as yet between the Argentine Republic and Great Britain a Treaty which obliges them to grant the extradition of their criminals or accused persons, and if the Government of the latter nation déclares that it is not authorized to offer your Excellency reciprocity, I think that the case which is presented for your Excellency's décision cannot be decided in conformity with the désire of his Excellency the Minister of the United Kingdom, because, in default of Treaties, it could only be granted on the basis of reciprocity , which it has been impossible to ofier your Excellency, there not existing, as I understand, a uniform practice of nations which grants extradition in default of Treaties and offer of reciprocity.
This is not, however, the only difficulty which the case I am discussing présents to your Excellency, and which debars your Excellency irom acceding to the application addressed to you.
Among the documents which accompany the note of his Excellency the Minister of the United Kingdom , I do not find either the sworn évidence of the Judicial Decree (»testimonio literal del auto judicial«) that ordered that your Excellency should be applied to for the extradition in question, nor the legalized copy of the légal dispositions applicable to the crime charged according to English législation, as expressly required by Article 651 of the above-mentioned Code of Procédure.
As by the same Code (Article 652), in the event of its being believed possible to grant the application for extradition, your Excellency has to forward to the Sectional Judge, the application which has been addressed to you, together with the previous documents, in order that the said Judge
Grande - Bretagne^ Argentine.
may décide whether there is or not cause to grant it, from whose décision appeal can be made to the Suprême Court (Article 659), it follows that the procédure with regard to extradition cases is confided by our Law to the judicial power making their décisions final in such matters.
Now, your Excellency will remember that not long ago the Suprême Fédéral Court decided in an application for extradition that it was not to proceed , the Représentative of the Government requesting it not having attached to it the sworn évidence of the judicial Decree (»testimonio del auto judicial «) ordering the application to your Excellency for the extradition requested. The Suprême Court declared then that in matters of extradition and in default of a Treaty the application, as also the proceedings that relate to it, are subject to and must be substantiated in accordance with the internai législation of the State applied to, the Judges of the country being in duty bound to conform to its régulations without having the power to deviate from onè more than from another, nor from any of them.
In view of the considération set forth , it is my opinion that your Excellency cannot comply with the application for extradition referred to in the présent Report.
(Signed) Antonio E. Malaver.
Buenos Ayres , October 23, 1890.
Foreign Office, Buenos Ayres, October 24, 1890. In view of the foregoing opinion of the Attorney- General of the nation, which is entirely approved,
The Executive Power résolves:
That the extradition of James Coupe shall not take place , that a copy of the said opinion, together with the above Resolutions, be communicated to the Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of Her Britannic Majesty in reply to his notes of the 17th and 20th instants, and that the documents which he was good enough to transmit in support of the application be returned to him. Let this be communicated to the Attorney - General of the nation.
(Signed) Pellegrini.
True copy : Eduardo Costa.
(Signed) Ricardo Pardo.
Inclosure 4 in No. 10.
Mr. Pakenham to Senor Costa.
M. le Ministre, Buenos Ayres, November 3, 1890.
I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Excellency's note of the 24th ultimo , with its inslosure , containing the reply of the Argentine Government in the matter of the request on the part of Her Majesty's Government for the arrest and extradition of one James Coupe,
Extradition de Jabez Spencer Balfour.
accused of forgery and theft on his own written confession, which formed one of the papers inclosed in my note of the 17th ultimo.
While expressing my regret for the décision at which the Argentine Government have arrived, I think that fnrther observations on my part at présent would serve no useful purpose ; but nevertheless, as it is évident that this misadventure has occurred mainly owing to the nonfulfilment as yet of the formality of intialling the proposed altération in Article V of the Extradition Convention of the 22nd May, 1889, a proeeeding to which, from the nature of our conversation of the 3 Ist ultimo, I understand your Excellency accèdes, subject always to the sanction of the Législature, I should feel very much obliged if you would kindly take prompt and efficacious steps that this matter may be placed before the Législature at an early date of their next Session , giving it also the advantage of a friendly recommendation on your Excellency's part to prompt and favourable treatment.
As I am sending to London at an early opportunity a full account of what has passed in référence to this matter, I should feel much obliged if your Excellency would kindly cause me to be favoured with a prompt reply to the présent note , in order that it may take its place in the correspondence.
I avail, &c.
(Signed) F, Pakenham.
No. 11.
(Home Office to Foreign Office. — (Received December 13.) Sir, Whitehall, December 12, 1890.
I am directed by the Secretary of State to return to you herewith the inclosures which accompanied your letter of the 5th instant respecting the application for the extradition of James Coupe and the Extradition Treaty with the Argentine Kepublic , and I am to request that you will express to Lord Salisbury Mr. Matthews' satisfaction with the steps which have been taken.
I am, &c.
(Signed) E. Leigh Pemberton.
No. 12.
The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Pakenham. Sir, Foreign Office , December 16, 1890.
I approve the action taken by you with référence to the application to the Argentine Government for the extradition of James Coupe, as reported in your despatch of the 3rd ultimo.
I am, &c.
(Signed) Salisbury.
Grande-Bretagne, Portugal.
