No. 6.
No. 7.
Memorandum by Mr. Robertson on the Home Office letter of October 22, 1896.
THE question of extradition between this country and Japan was very fully considered in 1892 and 1893.
The objections to a Treaty were then found to be very strong. They were based mainly on five grounds:-
1. The unsatisfactory attitude of the Japanese, who are perpetually shifting their ground, and asking for fresh concessions on a new basis.
2. The difficulty of coming to an arrangement as to the surrender of subjects of third States by one party to the other. [In ordinary Treaties this would not arise; in the case of Japan it is caused by the existence of extra-territorial jurisdiction in Japan on the part of various foreign Powers, which would give rise to a conflict of claims.]
3. The difficulty as to the surrender of British subjects to a third State, which is enhanced by the fact that we cannot undertake a reciprocal engagement as to the surrender of Japanese subjects to a third State.
4. The difficulty as to the surrender of nationals. [This it has since been found possible to meet by inserting an "optional" clause based on later precedents.]
5. Last, but not least, the existence of British extra-territorial jurisdiction in Japan; which renders it almost impossible to devise any extradition machinery for present use that would not clash with our existing rights. As to this point the Legal Adviser has expressed himself as decidedly opposed,* on various legal and other grounds, to the conclusion of an Extradition Treaty with Japan until our extra-territorial jurisdiction in that country shall have lapsed.
These objections were summarized by Sir T. Sanderson in a Memorandum dated the 14th August, 1893, and the negotiation was eventually abandoned by Lord Rosebery, pending the settlement of the question of Japanese Treaty revision. Since that date a single case has occurred in which we have asked for the arrest of a British fugitive by Japanese authorities, in accordance with two previous precedents, and the request was granted as "an act of State." It gave occasion, however, to the Japanese Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs to suggest the resumption of negotiations for an Extradition Treaty, and Sir E. Satow has reported this, with one or two suggestions of his own for meeting legal difficulties in case of our reconsidering the subject in consequence of the signature of the Commercial Treaty of 1894.
But the situation remains materially unchanged. The Treaty of 1894 will not come into force until 1899, and in the meanwhile our jurisdiction in Japan is maintained, and the objections above referred to appear as insuperable as ever. The question has again been referred to the Home Office, and by them to Sir J. Bridge, whose answer shows that the difficulties on the points of detail, especially as regards the surrender of subjects of third States, and the surrender of British subjects to third States, are far from solution. These are the points to which the Japanese attach special importance, and which were originally found insurmountable, even in the case of a Provisional Agreement.
The question of principle is also untouched, and the Home Office assume throughout that in no case could a Treaty of Extradition come into force until the cessation of our Consular jurisdiction.
The fact should not be lost sight of that even if we were to conclude an Extradition Treaty of any sort with Japan now, we should probably soon be confronted with claims for similar arrangements on the part of Turkey, Persia, and possibly China, where we possess Consular jurisdiction.
I submit that in these circumstances it would be extremely inexpedient to resume negotiations for an Extradition Treaty with Japan at the present moment, and that the consideration of the matter should be postponed until the lapse of our Consular jurisdiction in Japan places us in a position to deal with the various matters in dispute upon clear ground, and from an entirely different standpoint.
Foreign Office, November 8, 1896.
C. B. R.
(No. 16. Treaty.) Sir,
The Marquess of Salisbury to Sir E. Satow.
Foreign Office, November 13, 1896. WITH reference to your despatch No. 18, Treaty, of the 5th December last, I have to inform you that, after a very careful consideration of all the issues involved, Her Majesty's Government are of opinion that it would at present not serve any useful end to resume negotiations for an Extradition Treaty between this country and Japan. As soon, however, as the provisions of the Commercial Treaty of 1894 shall have come into force, they will be prepared to re-examine the question, with the view, if possible, of meeting the wishes of the Japanese Government for a permanent arrangement.
I am, &c.
(Signed)
No. 8.
The Marquess of Salisbury to Sir E. Satow.
(No. 17. Treaty. Confidential.)
Sir,
SALISBURY.
Foreign Office, November 13, 1896. WITH reference to my immediately preceding despatch, Treaty, of the 13th instant, I inclose, for your confidential information, a copy of a Memorandum which has been drawn in this Department,* and which will serve to explain to you the difficulties which stand in the way of concluding at the present time any Extradition Treaty with Japan.
I am, &c.
up
No. 9.
(Signed)
SALISBURY,
Sir E. Satow to the Marquess of Salisbury.-(Received February 8.)
(No. 1. Treaty.) My Lord,
Tókið, January 8, 1897. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge receipt of your Lordship's despatch No. 16, Treaty, informing me that Her Majesty's Government are of opinion that it would at present not serve any useful end to resume negotiations for an Extradition Treaty between Great Britain and Japan, but that as soon as the provisions of the Commercial Treaty of 1894 shall have come into force, they will be prepared to re-examine the question, with the view, if possible, of meeting the wishes of the Japanese Government for a permanent arrangement.
Yesterday, in conversation with Count Okuma, I took the opportunity of verbally informing him of the views of Her Majesty's Government with reference to the remarks on this subject made to me by his predecessor, Marquis Saionji, as reported in my despatch No. 18, Treaty, of the 5th December, 1895, and I explained to him the difficulty such a negotiation would present as long as extra-territorial jurisdiction continues to be exercised in Japan by the various Treaty Powers.
His Excellency replied that he quite understood the point, and it seemed to him, under the circumstances, better to postpone the consideration of the subject. Hereafter, when the facilities for communication with foreign countries came to be multiplied, as it might be anticipated would happen when the new Treaties took effect, an Extradition Treaty might be useful, especially in view of the proximity of the British Colony of Hong Kong. Till then he saw no objection to acting on the same plan as hitherto, of dealing with such cases as might arise on the grounds of international comity. I have, &c. (Signed) ERNEST SATOW.
* See Mr. Davidson's Memorandum, April 10, 1893, p. 16 (Print, 6417).
No. 6.
330