an alien may enter the military service as a volunteer, or may be compelled to serve the state in the maintenance of public order, which may be as essential to him as to citizens. Such service might be in the defense against savages or irresponsible bodies of men.

(e) Rights of property and inheritance may be determined by local laws, and are not always the same for alien and national.

(f) A state may require a passport or other documentary evidence of identity. In some instances the documents of identification must contain the photograph of the alien, as well as the ordinary description of his physical characteristics.

EXTRADITION.

49. Extradition is the surrender by one state to another state for trial and punishment of a person accused of crime committed outside the jurisdiction of the state making

the surrender.

Not only may a state expel an offender against its own wellbeing, but it may surrender a person accused of crime committed outside of its jurisdiction. This principle of extradition has long been recognized, though it cannot be claimed that there is a universally accepted right to demand a criminal who has sought refuge in a foreign state. Grotius in 1625 said: "Since, however, it is not customary for states to permit another state to enter its territory under arms for the sake of administering punishment, nor is it expedient, it follows that the state where the one who has committed the offense sojourns ought to do one of two things: Either on demand it should punish the guilty party, or it should turn him over for trial to the state making the demand." Treaties of extradition are particularly the product of the nineteenth century, though the practice of surrendering certain fugitives from justice was common among states in earlier days. There are now so many treaties of extradition that a criminal can rarely escape justice by flight to another state.

3 De Jure Belli ac Pacis, lib. II, c. XXI, § IV, 1.

WILS. INT.L.-10

(a) Extradition is an act of the state. While surrender is sometimes granted as an act of courtesy, extradition is usually based on treaty agreement. Mr. Justice Miller in 1886 said: "It is only in modern times that the nations of the earth have imposed upon themselves the obligation of delivering up these fugitives from justice to the states where their crimes were committed for trial and punishment. This has been done generally by treaties made by one independent government with another. Prior to these treaties, and apart from them, it may be stated, as the general result of the writers upon international law, that there was no well-defined obligation on one country to deliver up such fugitives to another, and, though such delivery was often made, it was upon the principle of comity, and within the discretion of the government whose action was invoked; and it has never been recognized as among those obligations of one government towards another which rest upon established principles of international law."

(b) The crimes for which extradition is granted vary in the different treaties. In general, all crimes, except offenses against religious laws and such as are purely political, are regarded as extraditable. Political crimes, accompanied by acts of violence against the person or family of the sovereign, are usually made liable to extradition. Desertion from the military service is often excluded from the list of extraditable offenses.

(c) Nationals of a state, who have taken refuge in a foreign state and are accused of an extraditable crime committed within their own state, are usually extradited on demand. Extradition of the nationals of a state who are within its jurisdiction is at present at the discretion of the state, though they are usually given up on demand.

Extradition may be delayed if the person requisitioned is charged with or under sentence for crime committed in the state within whose jurisdiction he is.

4 United States v. Rauscher, 119 U. S. 407, 7 Sup. Ct. 234, 30 L. Ed. 425.

51 Moore, Extradition, p. 308; Treaty between the United States and Russia 1887, art. III.

61 Moore, Extradition, p. 152.

When a fugitive from justice is claimed by two or more powers, later practice and treaties generally give preference to prior demand. Sometimes the gravity of the crime is considered.

(d) A person who has been surrendered to a state on account of an offense mentioned in an extradition treaty, and has satisfied the state as to that offense, is usually allowed a reasonable time in which to leave the state before prosecution for any crime committed previous to extradition.

(e) Procedure in extradition is well established. Extradition proceedings are usually through officials of national governments, though local officials are sometimes authorized to receive applications for requisitions. Requisitions must show evidence of an offense enumerated in the treaty between the states concerned and of the identity of the person demanded. Provisional arrest and detention is often permitted pending the presentation of the formal proofs upon which a demand for extradition is based.8

EXEMPTIONS FROM JURISDICTION.

50. Immunity from local jurisdiction is generally granted to certain officials of a foreign state and the persons or 'ngs under their control.

"The world being composed of distinct sovereignties, possessing equal rights and equal independence, whose mutual benefit is promoted by intercourse with each other, and by an interchange of those good offices which humanity dictates and its wants require, all sovereigns have consented to a relaxation in practice, in cases under certain peculiar circumstances, of that absolute and complete jurisdiction within their respective territories which sovereignty confers. *

"This perfect equality and absolute independence of sovereigns, and this common interest impelling them to mutual in

7 In case of the frontier states and territories of the United States and of Mexico, requisitions may under certain circumstances be made by local officials. Treaty of the United States and Mexico, Feb. 22, 1899, art. IX, 31 Stat. 1818.

8 For United States practice in general, see 4 Moore, §§ 579-622.

tercourse and an interchange of good offices with each other, have given rise to a class of cases in which every sovereign is understood to waive the exercise of a part of that complete exclusive territorial jurisdiction, which has been stated to be the attribute of every nation.

"First. One of these is admitted to be the exemption of the person of the sovereign from arrest or detention within a foreign territory. *

* *

"Second. A second case, standing on the same principles. with the first, is the immunity which all civilized nations allow to foreign ministers. *

* *

"Third. A third case in which a sovereign is understood to cede a portion of his territorial jurisdiction is where he allows the troops of a foreign prince to pass through his dominions."

9

(a) The sovereign is exempt from both civil and criminal jurisdiction.10 His retinue and hôtel or place of residence are exempt from local jurisdiction. He may not make his hôtel an asylum for those not of his retinue. A foreign sovereign may be invited to leave, or even be expelled by force, if his acts unduly endanger the peace of the state of his sojourn.

A sovereign may lay aside his official capacity and engage in business or travel incognito. He is then entitled to the privileges accorded to the position he has assumed, but can at any time resume his sovereign personality and the immunities appertaining thereto.

(b) A diplomatic agent, as a representative of the sovereignty of the state which sends him, is accorded immunities similar to those accorded to the sovereign.11

(c) A consul, representing the commercial and business affairs of his state, is usually accorded the exemption needful for the performance of his functions.12

(d) It is held that the grant of free passage through a state for a foreign army "implies a waiver of all jurisdiction over

Schooner Exchange v. McFaddon (1812) 7 Cranch, 116, 3 L. Ed. 287. 10 In the case of Vavasseur v. Krupp, [1878] L. R. 9 Ch. Div. 351, it was decided that the Mikado of Japan was not liable under the English patent law. In the case of Mighell v. Sultan of Johore, 1 Q. B. [1894] 149, it was decided that the sovereign was exempt from suit for breach of promise of marriage.

11 See section 61.

12 See section 68.

the troops during their passage, and permits the foreign general to use that discipline, and to inflict those punishments, which the government of his army may require."

" 13

(e) Naval forces, entering or remaining within the maritime jurisdiction of a foreign state in time of peace, are usually exempt from local laws and regulations, except such as are necessary for the peace and well-being of the port.1 Naval vessels, and the boats, tenders, etc., belonging thereto, with their officers and crews, are exempt from local jurisdiction. This exemption does not necessarily extend to any of the officers or crew of the vessel who may violate the local law when on shore, though it is customary for local authorities to send to the commander members of his crew who have been guilty only of minor offenses on shore. The right of asylum on public vessels, formerly maintained, is now generally disclaimed, except in uncivilized regions, or in time of revolution, or under exceptional circumstances.15

The abuse of exemptions may lead to a request that the vessel be withdrawn, or in an extreme case to the use of force. The request would ordinarily be through the diplomatic agent of the state of the flag of the vessel. In recent years there has been a tendency to claim that a state which receives a foreign naval vessel within jurisdiction is under obligation to afford it a reasonable degree of protection. In a communication to the United States minister to Spain in regard to the destruction of the U. S. S. Maine in Habana harbor, the Secretary of State said of the responsibility of the Spanish govern

13 Exchange v. McFaddon, 7 Cranch, 116, 3 L. Ed. 287.

14 By Belgian Royal Decree of February 18, 1901, art. VII, "captains of foreign men of war are required to observe the laws and regulations concerning the police, public health, taxes, and imposts, unless exception be made by particular convention or by international usage."

15 The U. S. Navy Regulations state: "308. The right of asylum for political or other refugees has no foundation in international law. In countries, however, where frequent insurrections occur, and constant instability of government exists, usage sanctions the granting of asylum; but even in the waters of such countries, officers should refuse all applications for asylum except when required by the interests of humanity in extreme or exceptional cases, such as the pursuit of a refugee by a mob. Officers must not directly nor indirectly invite refugees to accept asylum."