CO129-396 - Public Offices - 1912 — Page 443

439

(see R. v Gonez, 9 Q.B.D. 93 & Sevarkar's case 2, K.B. 1930, 1074). The order nisi calls upon the Secretary of State, the commé itting Magistrate, and the foreign Government to shew cause why a

shewn writ should not issue. In practice, cause is, es a rule, only by one of the Law Officers of the Crown; but it is probable that the foreign Government would be entitled to shew cause sep- arately by counsel, if, for any reason, (e.g. for the purpose of supporting a charge which the Law Officer for the Crown had abandon- ed) this was deemed desirable.

This I believe to be the practice in proceedings for a habeas Corpus in extradition cases; but perhaps it may be con- sidered advisable either to consult the Crewn Office, or the Director of Public Prosecutions upon the matter.

As to how the principle involved is regarded in the United States, I venture to refer to 268 on page 307 of Hoore on Extradition, 1891, vol. 1., where it is stated that "both the alleged fugitive and the demanding Government may be represented at their own expense" before the Magistrate.

I AA,

siz,

Your obedient Servant,

(signed) A. de Rutzen