R
216
No. 56.
(TRANSVAAL: GENERAL.)
THE EXTRADITION ACTS.
THE FUGITIVE OFFENDERS ACT, 1881.
[As to whether a prisoner surrendered in pursuance of an extradition Treaty by a Foreign country to a part of His Majesty's Dominions other than the United Kingdom is in legal custody if necessarily retained in England during transit.]
The following is a copy of a letter from the Home Office :---
MY LORD,
Whitehall,
September 8, 1906.
I AM directed by the Secretary of State to transmit herewith a Case, prepared in this Department on a point of law in connection with the Extradition Acts and the Fugitive Offenders Act, and to say that he will be much obliged if you
will move the Law Officers of the Crown to favour him with their opinion thereon.
The Solicitor to the Treasury.
I am, &c.,
H. B. SIMPSON,
The Case, transmitted with the foregoing letter, is annexed hereto.
The Attorney- and Solicitor-General are requested to favour the Secretary of State with their opinion on the questions raised in the annexed Case as asked in Mr. Simpson's letter.
The Law Officers are requested to advise whether a prisoner, surrendered in pursuance of an Extradition Treaty by a foreign country to a part of His Majesty's dominions other than the United Kingdom, is in legal custody if necessarily retained in England during transit.
The question is raised by the case of one James Boyd, who was charged with larceny in the Transvaal and whose extradition was granted by the Argentine Government. On his way from America to Cape Town he landed in the custody of a Johannesburg police officer at Southampton on the 17th March last, and while waiting for a boat to Cape Town was lodged for a week at a Metropolitan Police Station. A warrant for his arrest under the Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881 was obtained, in order that if he should apply for Habeas Corpus or should attempt to escape, proceedings might be taken under that Act to ensure his return to the Transvaal. It may be that this step was unnecessary, and with a view to similar cases which may arise in the future the Secretary of State desires to have the Law Officers' opinion on the matter. It would, of course, be extremely inconvenient that an extradition prisoner merely in transit through England, should have to be brought up at Bow Street, the evidence of his criminality reviewed by the Magis- trate, and the whole precedure prescribed by the Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881, gone through, involving, as it would, a delay of several weeks; and the adoption of such a course might give rise to protests from the Colony.
A case submitted to the Law Officers in December, 1903, and their opinion* thereon is attached for reference. Especial attention is drawn to the opinion expressed by Mr. Vaughan in 1887, that for the purposes of extradition the Colonies and Great Britain were intended to be regarded as identical.
25 Wt 1649 1007 D & S 5 26939
No. 210 in Vol. VI.
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
-885
TPLEC.O.
------------..................
16 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
216