Zaldua to Evarts, July 1, 1878

The minister of foreign affairs of Colombia to Mr. Evarts.

I have laid before the President of the Union the note of your excellency of April 22, 1878, in which you state that your department has been officially informed that, by order of the president of the sovereign State of Panama, C. G. Scrafford, who was charged with the crime of forgery in the State of Kansas in your republic, and who has fled to Peru, whence his extradition was obtained in pursuance of the treaty governing such cases which exists between the two nations, had been set at liberty.

Your excellency expresses the deep regret that has been caused to your government by this proceeding, which, in view of the circumstances, it considers to be in violation not only of international courtesy, but also of the spirit of the treaty of 1846 between tye American Union and Colombia.

In reply, and in obedience to instructions which I have received from his excellency the President, I have the honor to inform your excellency that the executive of the nation has approved the measure adopted in this case by the government of the sovereign State of Panama, it being in accordance with article 15 of the national constitution, paragraph 4, which is as follows:

“Article 15. An esseniial and invariable basis of the union between the States is the recognition and the guarantee by the general government, and by the governments of each one of the States, of the individual rights which belong to the inhabitants of and to travelers through the United States of Colombia, viz:

“4th. Personal safety, so that it shall not be violated with impunity by another individual or by the public authorities, and that no one shall be arrested or detained save on account of some criminal act or by way of correctional penalty, or tried by extraordinary commissions or courts, or punished without having had a hearing in court, and all this in virtue of pre-existing law.”

The same constitution is so jealous on this subject, that even when common crimes committed in any State of the Union are concerned, it provides the following conditions for the extradition of the guilty party:

“Article 10. It is obligatory upon the authorities of each State to surrender to the authorities of that one in which a common crime has been committed, the person whose surrender is demanded, and for whose arrest a warrant has been issued not in violatoin of the individual rights enumerated in Art. 15 of this constitution; which shall be proved by the necessary documents accompanying the warrant of arrest.”

As no treaty for the extradition of criminals exists between the two republics, the time had not arrived to permit on our soil the detention of a foreign citizen, who, according to our laws, had committed no criminal act for which he could be brought to trial, and who could not be arrested by way of correctional penalty.

Even if such a treaty had existed, your excellency will observe that it would not have been applicable to the present case, since the question was not of the extradition of an individual residing in the Territory of Colombia, but of permitting the conveyance across the Isthmus of a foreigner who had been arrested according to foreign laws.

The provisions contained in article 35 of the treaty between the two republics are not applicable to the case of Scrafford, because they refer exclusively to free transit and to the commercial privileges which have been granted to American citizens and to their goods.

If your excellency will attentively consider the terms of those exemptions, I do not doubt that you will reach the conclusion without any difficulty whatever, that they do not include the concession of equal facilities for the transportation of a foreigner arrested in virtue of judicial orders issued in a foreign country.

The Government of Colombia has been pained to learn that that of the American Union has regarded the measure adopted in this matter by the executive of the sovereign State of Panama as not being in accord with the spirit of the treaty of friendship now existing between the two republics, or with the liberality of the franchises which the two nations should reciprocally grant to each other, but it feels confident that the foregoing explanations will be found perfectly satisfactory.

This incident being thus terminated, I think proper to inform your excellency that there would be no objections on the part of Colombia to concluding a treaty for the extradition of criminals with the United States, in order to avoid in future the repetition of an occurrence like that which recently took place on the Isthmus.

With sentiments of consideration, &c.,