The Acting Secretary of
State to the British
Ambassador.
Department of State,
Washington, June 22,
1906.
No. 468.]
Excellency: Referring to your note of the 24th
ultimo, I have the honor to inclose herewith a copy of a letter from the
Acting Attorney-General relating to the case of Arthur F. McIntire, who
is imprisoned in this country for a nonextraditable offense, after
having been brought here from London on a charge of embezzlement.
I have, etc.,
[Page 789]
[Inclosure.]
The Acting
Attorney-General to the Secretary
of State.
Department of Justice,
Washington, June 13,
1906.
Sir: In reply to your letter of the 4th
instant, I have the honor to inclose herewith for your information a
copy of a letter dated June 11, 1906, addressed to the
Attorney-General by the United States attorney at St. Louis,
relating to the case of Arthur McIntire, who is imprisoned in this
country for a nonextraditable offense after having been brought here
on a charge of embezzlement.
It appears from the report of the United States attorney that
McIntire was convicted in the United States court for the eastern
district of Missouri on the charge of having violated section 5480
of the Revised Statutes of the United. States, in that he devised a
scheme to defraud certain persons out of their money, etc., and that
he used the mails of the United States to further the scheme. On May
21, 1904, McIntire was sentenced to pay a fine of $1 and to be
imprisoned eighteen months in the Missouri penitentiary. From this
sentence he sued out a writ of error to the circuit court of appeals
for the eighth circuit, and gave bond in the sum of $7,000, with
John H. Vette as surety. The writ of error was abandoned and bond
declared forfeited. McIntire fled the country and was subsequently
located in London.
Application was made to the United States attorney at St. Louis by
Thomas B. Harvey, attorney for Price, who it is claimed had expended
a large sum of money in securing the return of McIntire to the
United States, to have McIntire extradited. The United States
attorney replied that McIntire had been convicted for an offense not
extraditable under the treaty. Subsequently, as the United States
attorney is informed, Price made a charge of embezzlement against
McIntire, and the assistant prosecuting attorney for St. Louis filed
an information. This information was the basis of the extradition
proceedings. The United States attorney is not advised as to the
merits or demerits of the prosecution upon the charge of
embezzlement.
About May 30, 1905, McIntire, in company with Vette and Harvey, came
to the United States attorney’s office in St. Louis and stated that
he desired to surrender himself to undergo the sentence imposed by
the United States court. The United States attorney then told
McIntire that the offense for which he had been convicted was not
extraditable, and that so far as the United States was concerned he
was at liberty to return to London if he desired. McIntire answered
that he wished to serve his sentence.
Very respectfully,
[Sub-inclosure.]
Mr. Dyer to the
Attorney-General.
Department of Justice,
United States Attorney’s
Office,
Eastern District
of Missouri,
St.
Louis, June 11,
1906.
Sir: Your letter of the 6th instant (S. B.
S. 77360), covering certain memoranda and correspondence touching
the matter of Arthur F. McIntire, was duly received. The following
are the facts, so far as the same have come to my knowledge:
McIntire was indicted by the grand jury for the eastern division of
the eastern judicial district of Missouri the 30th day of October,
1903. Lie was charged with a violation of section 5480 of the
Revised Statutes of the United States, in that he had devised a
scheme and artifice to defraud certain persons out of their money
and property, and that in the execution of such scheme McIntire
contemplated the use of the United States mail, and that such mail
was actually used in furtherance of the same.
He was tried and convicted on the 21st of May, 1904, and sentenced to
pay a fine of $1 and to be imprisoned for eighteen months in the
Missouri penitentiary. From this judgment and sentence McIntire sued
out a writ of error to the United States circuit court of appeals
for the eighth circuit, and gave a supersedeas bond in the sum of
$7,000, with John H. Vette as surety. He failed to prosecute his
writ of error; the case was duly docketed in the court of appeals,
and upon motion the same was dismissed. Subsequently a forfeiture of
the bond was taken and a scire facias issued.
To this an answer was filed by the surety, in which he claimed that
one Price (who had agreed to hold him harmless on said bond) had
expended a
[Page 790]
large sum of
money in securing the return of McIntire to the United States. To
this answer I filed a motion for judgment, notwithstanding the
answer. This motion is still pending before the court and undisposed
of. After the giving of the bond aforesaid, McIntire fled the
country and was subsequently located in London. Application was made
to me by Thomas B. Harvey, esq., attorney for Price and Vette, to
have McIntire extradited. I told him that the offense for which
McIntire had been prosecuted and convicted was not extraditable
under the treaty, and that no steps would be taken by me to bring
him back. Subsequently, as I am informed, the said Price made a
charge of embezzlement against McIntire, and the assistant
prosecuting attorney for this city filed an information against
McIntire, and that this information was the basis upon which
extradition proceedings were had. Whatever may have been the merits
or demerits of such a prosecution I am not advised, and hence
express no opinion.
On or about the 30th of May, 1905, McIntire, in company with Vette
and Harvey, came to my office and said that he desired to surrender
himself in execution of the judgment against him. I plainly told him
in the presence of Vette, Harvey, and others at the time in my
office, that the offense for which he stood convicted was not an
extraditable one, and that so far as the United States was concerned
he was at perfect liberty to return to London if he so desired. He
said that he was tired of being a fugitive and wanted to serve his
sentence. He thereupon went into the custody of the marshal and is
serving said sentence. These are the facts, to the best of my
knowledge.
Respectfully,
David P. Dyer,
United States Attorney.