If the Muscat State Council is in a position to negotiate a treaty along the lines suggested the Department would be prepared, in view of the financial situation in Muscat, and as an exceptional measure, to give assurances that no objection would be offered, pending the approval or rejection of the treaty by the United States Senate, to the collection of higher duties on goods of American origin imported into Muscat than those provided for in Article III of the Treaty of 1833. Such assurances would be given, however, on the understanding that the Muscat State Council would, in its turn, furnish assurances that pending the same period American nationals in Muscat would receive the treatment specified in the proposed new treaty. Accept [etc.] For the Secretary of State: GREECE EXTRADITION TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND GREECE, SIGNED MAY 6, 1931 211.68/46 The Secretary of State to the Minister in Greece (Skinner) No. 310 WASHINGTON, November 27, 1929. SIR: The Department has received your despatch No. 1106 of October 19, 1929,1 with which you enclose a translation of a note from the Greek Foreign Office1 suggesting two changes in the draft treaty of extradition which your Legation, under instructions from the Department, has heretofore presented to the Greek Government.2 With respect to the change suggested in Article IX of the draft treaty so as to provide for the payment by the surrendering government of the expenses of extradition proceedings, it may be said that the law of the United States contemplates the payment of such expenses by the demanding government. In this relation reference is made to the provisions of law found in Volume 32 of the Statutes at Large, at page 475, namely: "All the fees and costs in extradition cases shall be paid out of the appropriations to defray the expenses of the judiciary, and the Attorney General shall certify to the Secretary of State the amounts to be paid to the United States on account of said fees and costs in extradition cases by the foreign government requesting the extradition, and the Secretary of State shall cause said amounts to be collected and transmitted to the Attorney General for deposit in the Treasury of the United States." It may be added that in no extradition treaty of the United States is it provided that the surrendering government shall defray the general expenses of the extradition proceeding and in view of the above quoted provisions of law and of the system of government obtaining in the United States which would render it impracticable for this Government to consent to any such arrangement, the Department finds it is unable to agree to the modification of Article IX of the draft treaty which is desired by the Greek Government. However, the Department is willing to go as far as may be possible toward meeting 1 Not printed. The draft treaty was enclosed in Department's instruction No. 103, December 31, 1924, not printed; for text of the treaty as signed, see p. 378. the desire of the Greek Government in this respect and therefore suggests that Article IX of the draft treaty be amended so as to read as follows: "The appropriate legal officers of the country where the proceedings of extradition are had, shall assist the officers of the government demanding the extradition before the respective judges and magistrates, by every legal means within their power; and no claim other than for the board and lodging of a fugitive prior to his surrender, arising out of the arrest, detention, examination and surrender of fugitives under this treaty, shall be made against the government demanding the extradition; provided, however, that any officer or officers of the surrendering government giving assistance, who shall, in the usual course of their duty receive no salary or compensation other than specific fees for services performed, shall be entitled to receive from the government demanding the extradition the customary fees for the acts or services performed by them in the same manner and to the same amount as though such acts or services had been performed in ordinary criminal proceedings under the laws of the country of which they are officers." In submitting the proposed change to the Greek Government you will advise it that this represents the utmost limit of concession which the Government of the United States is in a position to make on the indicated point. So far as concerns the request of the Greek Government for the omission from Article XI of the draft treaty of provisions contemplating the making by a diplomatic or consular officer of a complaint under oath in order to bring about the arrest of a fugitive, the Department authorizes you to state to the Foreign Office that it would be willing to amend the second paragraph of Article XI of the draft treaty so as to substitute for the last sentence thereof and also for the third paragraph of that Article, the following, which it would seem might well be made into a separate paragraph: "The arrest of the fugitive shall be brought about in accordance with the laws of the respective countries, and if, after an examination, it shall be decided, according to the law and the evidence, that extradition is due pursuant to this treaty, the fugitive shall be surrendered in conformity to the forms of law prescribed in such cases." In connection with the foregoing statement which you may make to the Foreign Office, the Department desires you to suggest the addition to Article II of the draft treaty, between present paragraphs numbered respectively 23 and 24, the following crimes and offenses: "24. Bribery. 25. Crimes or offenses against the bankruptcy laws. 26. Crimes or offenses against the laws for the suppression of the traffic in narcotics." The inclusion in the treaty of these additional extraditable offenses or any of them would of course necessitate the renumbering of the last paragraph of Article II. The Department hopes that the concessions which it has indicated its willingness to make to the desires of the Greek Government will result in the prompt conclusion of the negotiations and with respect to the additional extraditable offenses mentioned, informs you that while it would be glad to have any or all of these offenses included in the treaty it does not desire that the attempted inclusion of them should operate to delay the agreement upon the terms of the proposed treaty. I am [etc.] For the Secretary of State: 211.68/48 The Acting Secretary of State to the Minister in Greece (Skinner) No. 351 WASHINGTON, February 24, 1930. SIR: The Department has received your despatch No. 1228 of January 23, 1930,3 in further relation to the proposed Extradition Treaty between the United States and Greece. With respect to the matter of the costs involved in extradition cases in the United States, it may be pointed out that in its instruction No. 43 of June 30, 1927, the Department cited figures as to the charges incurred by foreign governments in three extradition proceedings conducted in the United States. It may be added that the Department's records show that recently a statement of charges in the amount of $32.70 was sent to the Canadian Government and similar statements in the amounts of $81.84 and $172.82 were sent to the Mexican and Italian Governments, respectively. In this relation it should be pointed out that the last two statements mentioned were sent in cases where extradition was contested, and that the Italian case involved two fugitives from justice, for which reason the expenses involved were, of course, larger than if but one fugitive had been involved. With regard to the matter of the cost of transportation, which was referred to by the Greek Foreign Office, it may be said that such cost would ordinarily be incurred after the surrendering of the fugitive to the agent of the demanding Government and, therefore, it would perhaps be unnecessary to refer to it in the Treaty. However, to 'Not printed. avoid any possible confusion in this matter, the Department considers that it would be well to preface the provisions of Article IX of the Treaty by the following sentence: "The expense of transportation of the fugitive shall be borne by the government which has preferred the demand for extradition." Regarding the inquiry of the Foreign Office concerning the meaning of the following words contained in the present draft treaty, "the fugitive shall be surrendered in conformity to the forms of law prescribed in such cases," reference may be made to the following provisions of Section 5270 of the revised statutes of the United States: "Whenever there is a treaty or convention for extradition between the Government of the United States and any foreign government, any justice of the Supreme Court, circuit judge, district judge, commissioner, authorized so to do by any of the courts of the United States, or judge of a court of record of general jurisdiction of any State, may, upon complaint made under oath, charging any person found within the limits of any State, district, or Territory, with having committed within the jurisdiction of any such foreign government any of the crimes provided for by such treaty or convention, issue his warrant for the apprehension of the person so charged, that he may be brought before such justice, judge, or commissioner, to the end that the evidence of criminality may be heard and considered." The complaint referred to in the provision of law just quoted would presumably be made by a consular officer of the demanding government acting under instructions from his government, and in this connection it should be pointed out that apparently consular officers of foreign governments, serving in the United States, experience no difficulty in making such a complaint. Generally speaking, the Department has no objection to the changes in verbiage suggested by the Foreign Office. However, it considers that the suggested change in Article V apparently does not convey the exact idea which the Foreign Office had in mind. Therefore, it is suggested that after the word "either" contained in the third line of the article there be substituted for the words down to and including the word "committed" the following words: "the surrendering or demanding country." With regard to the suggested addition to Article III the Department considers that the last two words "or not" are superfluous and might well be omitted. Similarly, the Department believes those words might be omitted from the suggested addition to Article VIII, and that the word "if" contained in that article might well be changed to "whether." The change in provisions of Article XI of the draft treaty, to which the Department agreed in its instruction No. 310 of November 27, |
