Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:10:46.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dispensing Irregular Justice: State Sponsored Abductions, Prisoner Surrenders, and Extralegal Renditions Along the Canada–United States Border

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Benjamin Hoy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1899, Levi Edwin Dudley, the American consul at Vancouver, complained about the ways that Canadian and American police officers enacted justice along their shared border. During one of Dudley's investigations into alleged abuses, he spoke with a Canadian officer about the ways that local agents on both sides of the border approached their jobs. The officer, speaking under conditions of anonymity, noted that “on the border here we must do things in an irregular way in order to preserve the peace.” The ability of criminals to move back and forth across the line forced American and Canadian officers to “‘stand in’ with each other, [or] we should have the country filled with desperadoes.” American officers transferred criminals over to Canadian agents without proper clearance and Canadian officers later returned the favor. This system of irregular justice utilized informal prisoner exchanges built on local understandings, professional courtesy, and mutual concern to circumvent the slow, uncertain, and expensive extradition process. For Dudley, this kind of behavior threatened the liberty of citizens in both countries. For the officers tasked with policing a region of bisecting jurisdictions, it was a necessary evil.

Type
Articles
Information
Law and History Review , Volume 35 , Issue 2 , May 2017 , pp. 321 - 350
Copyright
Copyright © the American Society for Legal History, Inc. 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

He acknowledges financial assistance from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council and the George P. Shultz Fellowship in Canadian Studies.

References

1. L. Edwin Dudley to David J. Hill, Dec. 7, 1899, RG 59, Despatches from U.S. Consuls in Vancouver, T114, Volume 2, Reel 2, National Archive and Record Administration (hereafter NARA), College Park (hereafter Despatches Vancouver vol. 2).

2. L. Edwin Dudley to David J. Hill, “Kidnapping from the State of Washington And Bringing Prisoners to B.C.,” May 29, 1900, RG 59, Despatches from U.S. Consuls in Vancouver, T114, Volume 3, Reel 3, NARA College Park (hereafter Despatches Vancouver vol. 3).

3. Although scholars of irregular justice have written extensively on the seizures that transpired in the twentieth century, they have written relatively little on the practice in the nineteenth century. What has been written on the nineteenth century has either focused on specific types of crime (desertion or embezzlement) or on landmark legal decisions as a means to understand contemporary policies. First Nations, who suffered from irregular seizures alongside and like their American and Canadian counterparts, have largely been left out of these discussions. Ward, Linda C., “Forcible Abduction Made Fashionable: United States v. Alvarez-Machain's Extension of the Ker-Frisbie Doctrine,” Arkansas Law Review 47 (1994): 477–504 Google Scholar; Pyle, Christopher H., Extradition, Politics, and Human Rights (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2001)Google Scholar; McDermott, John D., “Were They Really Rogues? Desertion in the Nineteenth-Century U.S. Army,” Nebraska History 78 (1997): 165–74Google Scholar; Nadelmann, Ethan A., “The Evolution of United States Involvement in the International Rendition of Fugitive Criminals,” New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 25 (1993): 813–85Google Scholar; Siegal, Charles D., “Individual Rights under Self-Executing Extradition Treaties—Dr. Alvarez-Machain's Case,” Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Journal 13 (1991): 765–98Google Scholar; Semmelman, Jacques, “Due Process, International Law, and Jurisdiction over Criminal Defendants Abducted Extraterritorially: The Ker-Frisbie Doctrine Reexamined,” Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 30 (1992): 513–76Google Scholar; and Unterman, Katherine, Uncle Sam's Policemen: The Pursuit of Fugitives Across Borders (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2015)Google Scholar.

4. L. Edwin Dudley to David J. Hill, “Marking of Boundary Line on Puget Sound Between United States and Canada,” May 10, 1900, Despatches Vancouver vol. 3; McKenna, Marian C., “Above the Blue Line: Policing the Frontier in the Canadian and American West, 1870–1900,” in The Borderlands of the American and Canadian Wests: Essays on Regional History of the Forty-Ninth Parallel, ed. Evans, Sterling (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2006), 95 Google Scholar; and A.W. Bash to James R. Hayden, February 2, 1882, RG 36, U.S. Customs Service, Puget Sound, Box 37 Letters sent to the Secretary of the Treasury 1881–1886, Book 1, National Archive Pacific Northwest Region.

5. West, Elliott, The Last Indian War: The Nez Perce Story (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 147–49Google Scholar; Morton, Desmond, “Cavalry or Police: Keeping the Peace on Two Adjacent Frontiers, 1870–1900,” Journal of Canadian Studies 12 (1977): 35 Google Scholar; A.L. Blake to A.W. Bash, September 8, 1884, RG 36, U.S. Customs Service, Puget Sound, Box 110, Letters Received from Subports and Inspectors, Osooyoos, Ft. Colville, Sehome, Seattle, 1882–1885, Folder 2, National Archive Pacific Northwest Region; Gibson, Dale, “Free Trade in Criminals: Canadian-American Extradition before 1890,” in Law, Policy, and International Justice: Essays in Honour of Maxwell Cohen, ed. Kaplan, William and McRae, Donald (McGill-Queen's University Press, 1993), 173 Google Scholar; and “Two Men Desert,” May 10, 1847, Isaac Cowie Fond, E 86/18, Scrap Book 1911–1912, Archive of Manitoba (hereafter AM).

6. British Columbia, “Attorney General Records,” n.d., T 0429 Microfilm BO 9323. Box 15, File 1, 208/08, British Columbia Archive (hereafter BCA); Zachary M. Hamilton, “Indian Justice,” n.d., 2–4, Zachary M. Hamilton Papers MG9 A50, M107, Folder 1, AM; William A. Pinkerton to H.A. Maclean, June 20, 1900, Attorney General Records, T 0429 Microfilm BO 9320. Box 6, File 1, 2375, BCA; Williams, David Ricardo, Call in Pinkerton's: American Detectives at Work for Canada (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1998), 83–84 Google Scholar; “To Protect the Honor of the United States,” Daily Ledger, August 9, 1906, 1; Hugh C. Morris to Herbert H.D. Pierce, April 15, 1903, RG 59, Despatches from U.S. Consuls in Windsor, T492, Volume 4, Reel 4, NARA College Park; Butts, Edward, Line of Fire: Heroism, Tragedy, and Canada's Police (Toronto: Dundurn, 2009), 30 Google Scholar; and Canada, Report of the Commissioner of the North-West Mounted Police Force 1889 (Ottawa: MacLean, Roger & Co., 1890), 42 Google Scholar.

7. Webster, Daniel and Ashburton, “A Treaty to Settle and Define the Boundaries Between the Territories of the United States and the Possessions of Her Britannic Majesty in North America; For the Final Suppression of the African Slave-Trade; and for the Giving up of Criminals Fugitives from Justice, in Certain Cases. [Treaty of Webster-Ashburton] Concluded August 9, 1842,” in Treaties and Conventions Concluded Between the United States of America and Other Powers Since July 4, 1776, ed. Davis, J.C. Bancroft (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1873), 374 Google Scholar; Great Britain and United States, “Extradition Convention Between the United States of America and Her Britannic Majesty, Supplementary to the Tenth Article of the Treaty, Concluded Between the Same High Contracting Parties on the Ninth Day of August, 1842. Convention Signed at Washington July 12, 1889, Ratifications Exchanged March 11, 1890, Entered into Force April 4, 1890,” in Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States of America, 1776–1949, vol. 12, Department of State Publication 8761 (Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office, 1974), 212–13Google Scholar; Nadelmann, “The Evolution of United States Involvement,” 821; and Pyle, Extradition, Politics, and Human Rights, 26, 63–67.

8. RG 8–20 Despatches from the Department of the Provincial Secretary, Box 11, B224134, 100.192, 100.199, 100.204, 100.209, Archive of Ontario (hereafter AO); Treaty of Webster-Ashburton, 374; and Pyle, Extradition, Politics, and Human Rights, 10, 75–77, 90–91.

9. “Extradition,” Fort Benton Record, June 26, 1875, 1,  Chronicling America: Historic American Newspapers, Library of Congress.

10. “The Extradition Case,” Helena Weekly Herald, July 22, 1875, 4, Chronicling America: Historic American Newspapers, Library of Congress.

11. Ibid.

12. T. Fournier to Department of Justice, April 7, 1874, 8, Alexander Morris (Lieutenant-Governor's collection) MG 12 B1, Microfilm Reel M135, No 997, AM.

13. Gabriel Leveille, interview by L.H. Thomas, Textual, September 19, 1955, 20, General, C92, Saskatchewan Archives Board; LaDow, Beth, The Medicine Line: Life and Death on a North American Borderland (New York: Routledge, 2001), 31 Google Scholar; “Battle of Cypress Hills (Known as the Cypress Massacre),” November 18, 1886, Southern Alberta Research Project, M4561, Box 2, Folder 148, Glenbow Archives; Moore, John Bassett, Report on Extradition with Returns of All Cases from August 9, 1842 to January 1, 1890 and an Index (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1890), 202 Google Scholar; Fred Bagley, “The ‘74 Mounties,’” 1938, iii, Fred Bagley Fond, Series 1, M-43, Glenbow Archives; and George Shepherd, “North of the Border Up Canada Way: A Canadian Link to Fort Benton's History” (The River Press, August 11, 1940), Southern Alberta Research Project, M4561, Box 4, Folder 284, Glenbow Archives.

14. George D.C. Pruner to Attorney General Victoria BC, “State of Washington Versus J.B. Atkinson, Complaint and Warrant Regarding Cross Border Shooting 1898,” April 1, 1898, Attorney General Records, T 0429 Microfilm BO 9319, Box 4, File 2, 561/98, BCA; F.S. Hussy to Arthur G. Smith, “Atkinson Waives Extradition,” April 12, 1898, Attorney General Records, T 0429 Microfilm BO 9319, Box 4, File 2, 603/98, BCA; and J.W. Romairy to F.S. Hussey, “J.B. Atkinson Shoots William Pattison Across BC Washington Boundary Line, Issue of Jurisdiction 1898,” March 18, 1898, Attorney General Records, T 0429 Microfilm BO 9319, Box 4, File 2, 467/98, BCA.

15. Dudley to Hill, December 7, 1899; Unterman, Uncle Sam's Policemen, 9; “Outwitted the Officer: An American Sheriff Deprived His Prisoner in British Territory,” News Advertiser, April 23, 1899, Attorney General Records, T 0429 Microfilm BO 9319, Box 4, File 2, 646/98, BCA.

16. “Untitled,” Emporia Weekly News, September 17, 1885, 2.

17. Pyle, Extradition, Politics, and Human Rights, 25–26, 36–37, 47, 63–66; Miller, Bradley, “‘A Carnival of Crime on Our Border’: International Law, Imperial Power, and Extradition in Canada, 1865–1883,” Canadian Historical Review 90 (2009): 647 Google Scholar; Reid, Richard M., African Canadians in Union Blue: Volunteering for the Cause in the Civil War (Vancouver: Canada University of British Columbia Press, 2014), 22–23 Google Scholar; and Unterman, Uncle Sam's Policemen, 35.

18. I use this definition of irregular justice to describe legal situations in which the jurisdiction of each country was clear and official representatives of the state either conducted the actions or were complicit in them. I do not use this term to encompass transnational captures that occurred in disputed territory (the Fenian raid at Pembina and the Aroostook War), abductions without a judicial aim (British impressments of American sailors), or abductions perpetrated by non-state actors for personal gain (slave owners trying to regain their chattel). I have included private detectives that operated on behalf of non-state actors (banks) for both judicial aims (bringing embezzlers back to stand trial) and personal aims (recovering stolen property) within this definition. Private detective agencies served both the State Department and private companies in much the same capacity, blurring the lines between justice as a purchasable commodity and as a public good. Unterman, Uncle Sam's Policemen, 9; and I.A. Dinsmore to F.S. Hussey, “Rex versus Frank Ceddio Extradition 1908,” February 5, 1908, Attorney General Records, T 0429 Microfilm BO 9323. Box 15, File 1, 630/08, BCA; Dudley to Hill, December 7, 1899.

19. Vermont, Supreme Court, Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Vermont, vol. VII (Middlebury: Knapp and Jewett, 1836), 121 Google Scholar.

20. Moore, John Bassett, A Treatise on Extradition and Interstate Rendition, vol. 1 (Boston: Boston Book Company, 1891), 294–95Google Scholar; and Vermont Supreme Court, Report of Cases Argued, VII:118.

21. United States, “Doc. No. 2. Correspondence Relating to the Case of James Grogan,” in Message from the President of the United States to the Two Houses of Congress, 27th Congress, 2d Session, House of Reps, Executive (Washington, DC: Gale and Seaton, 1841), 42–44 Google Scholar; Moore, A Treatise on Extradition 1:282–83; “Daring Outrage!” Niles' National Register 11, no. 5, October 2, 1841, 68; “Grogan Released,” Niles' National Register 11, no. 7, October 16, 1841, 100; and Carroll, Francis M., A Good and Wise Measure: The Search for the Canadian-American Boundary, 1783–1842 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001), 217–18Google Scholar.

22. Parker, Amasa J., Reports of Decisions in Criminal Cases Made at Term, at Chambers, and in the Courts of Oyer and Terminer of the State of New York, vol. IV (Albany: Weare C. Little, 1860), 253 Google Scholar.

23. Ibid., 254

24. Moore, A Treatise on Extradition 1: 295–96.

25. Britain also set historic precedence for prosecuting suspected criminals through irregular means at approximately the same time. British courts ruled in Ex parte Susannah Scott in 1829, for example, that the abduction of Susannah Scott from Brussels by English police officers did not invalidate the charges against her. O'Higgins, Paul, “Unlawful Seizure and Irregular Extradition,” British Year Book of International Law 36 (1960): 282 Google Scholar; and Schwabach, Aaron and Patchett, S.A., “Doctrine or Dictum: The Ker-Frisbie Doctrine and Official Abductions Which Breach International Law,” University of Miami Inter-American Law Review 25 (1993): 23 Google Scholar.

26. McCrady, David G., “Partitioning Sioux History,” in Living with Strangers: The Nineteenth-Century Sioux and the Canadian-American Borderlands (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2006), 16 Google Scholar; Laviolette, Gontran, The Sioux Indians in Canada (Regina: Saskatchewan Historical Society, 1944), 34–47 Google Scholar; Elias, Peter Douglas, The Dakota of the Canadian Northwest: Lessons for Survival (Regina: Canadian Plains Research Center, 2002), 19 Google Scholar; Winks, Robin W., The Civil War Years: Canada and the United States, 4th ed. (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1998), 172–76Google Scholar; “Notes Taken at a Meeting between the Lieut. Governor of the N.W. Territories Attended by the Officers of the Mounted Police at the Station and a Deputation of about 20 Sioux Indians Headed by a Chief Named ‘White Cap at Swan River on the 29th Day of June ’77,” June 29, 1877, RG 10, Indian Affairs, Black Series, Reel C-10114, Volume 3651, File 8527, Library of Canada (hereafter LAC); Bessler, John D., Legacy of Violence: Lynch Mobs and Executions in Minnesota (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2003), 25–46 Google Scholar; and Chomsky, Carol, “The United States-Dakota War Trials: A Study of Military Injustice,” Stanford Law Review 43 (1990): 15–21 Google Scholar.

27. Hargrave, Joseph James, Red River (Montreal: John Lovell, 1871), 316–19Google Scholar; Folwell, William Watts, A History of Minnesota, vol. 2 (Saint Paul: Minnesota Historical Society, 1924), 444–45Google Scholar; and Laviolette, The Sioux Indians in Canada, 55.

28. Gluek, Alvin C., “The Sioux Uprising: A Problem in International Relations,” Minnesota History 34 (1955): 319–22Google Scholar; Winks, The Civil War Years, 174–75; and Folwell, A History of Minnesota, 2:443–44. For an alternative description of the capture see “Indian Fighters Revive Old Days: Survivors of Hatch's Battalion Meet in Reunion,” The Minneapolis Journal, September 5, 1905, 7; and Laviolette, The Sioux Indians in Canada, 56–57.

29. H.H. Sibley to Joseph Holt, December 14, 1864, M68, Roll 1, U.S. Army Judge Advocate General Papers, Re Trials of Medicine Bottle and Little Six 1862–1865 Roll 1. [Originals held at NARA], Minnesota Historical Society (hereafter MHS); and Chomsky, “The United States-Dakota War Trials,” 43–44.

30. J. Holt to Secretary of War, “The Case of Shakopee and Medicine Bottle Sioux Indians under Sentence of Death Is Respectfully Returned to the Secretary of War for the President,” November 17, 1865, M68, Roll 1, U.S. Army Judge Advocate General Papers, Re Trials of Medicine Bottle and Little Six 1862–1865 Roll 1. [Originals held at NARA], MHS.

31. Bessler, Legacy of Violence, 65.

32. John H. Mackenzie to William W. Folwell, Aug. 25, 1906, Dakota Conflict of 1862 Manuscript Collections, M582, Reel 2, 1977B; 1781G3, 55102, MHS.

33. Minnesota, Executive Documents of the State of Minnesota for the Year 1867 (St. Paul: Press Printing co., 1868), 533 Google Scholar.

34. McDermott, “Were They Really Rogues?,” 166; Winks, The Civil War Years, 202; and Boyd, Belle, Belle Boyd in Camp and Prison (New York: Blelock & Company, 1866), 333 Google Scholar.

35. United States War Department for General Orders, General Orders of the War Department Numbering the Years 1861, 1862, & 1863 Adapted Specially for the Use of the Army and Navy of the United States, vol. 2 (New York: Derby & Miller, 1864), 134 Google Scholar; United States, Papers Relating to Foreign Affairs Accompanying the Annual Message of the President to the First Session of the Thirty-Eighth Congress, vol. 1 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1864), 468, 507–8, 535, 542Google Scholar; Winks, The Civil War Years, 201–2; Boyko, John, Blood and Daring: How Canada Fought the American Civil War and Forged a Nation (Toronto: Alfred A. Knopf, 2013), 136–37Google Scholar.

36. United States, Department of State, Papers Relating to Foreign Affairs (hereafter DS PRFA), 1st Sess., 38th Cong., part 1, 1864, 514–15, 534, 559, 560; DS PRFA, 2nd Sess., 38th Cong., Part II, 1865, 564–65, 603–4.

37. William H. Seward to Lord Lyons, January 3, 1863, 428, DS PRFA, 1st Sess., 38th Cong., part 1; Winks, The Civil War Years, 201–2; and W.H. Billing to John Ewan, October 2, 1861, RG 22–1863, Essex County Sheriff's Correspondence and Jail Reports, AO.

38. Hamilton Fish to Edward Thornton, Nov. 12, 1872, RG 13-A-2, Vol. 27, No. 810, LAC.

39. G. Manigault to John A. Macdonald, December 5, 1871, RG 13-A-2 Vol 26, no 1487, LAC; United States, Congress, Testimony Taken by the Joint Selection Committee to Inquire into the Conditions of Affairs in the Late Insurrectionary States— South Carolina, vol. III (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1872), 1725 Google Scholar; Kantrowitz, Stephen, More than Freedom: Fighting for Black Citizenship in a White Republic 1829–1889 (New York: Penguin, 2012), 311, 358–60Google Scholar; Williams, Lou Falkner, The Great South Carolina Ku Klux Klan Trials 1871–1872 (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1996), 1, 46–49 Google Scholar; West, Jerry Lee, The Reconstruction Ku Klux Klan in York County, South Carolina, 1865–1877 (Jefferson: McFarland and Company Inc, 2002), 98–100 Google Scholar; and Parrillo, Nicholas R., Against the Profit Motive: The Salary Revolution in American Government, 1780–1940 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013), 271 Google Scholar.

40. West, The Reconstruction Ku Klux Klan in York County, South Carolina, 1865–1877, 173; Edward Thornton to Governor General, November 15, 1872, RG 13-A-2, Vol. 27, No. 810, LAC; Landon, Fred, “The Kidnapping of Dr. Rufus Bratton,” Journal of Negro History 10 (1925): 330 Google Scholar; “Kidnapped in Canada: Astute Detectives Drug a Chicago Business Man,” The Daily Bee, June 30, 1885, 7; “The Charges Against the American Consul General Of Canada,” Daily Ohio Statesman, November 25, 1863, 2; Truth, A Statement of Dr. Bratton's Case Being Explanatory of the Ku-Klux Prosecutions in the Southern States (London, Ontario: Free Press, Steam Book, and Job Printing Co., 1872), 14–18 Google Scholar; Zuczek, Richard, “The Federal Government's Attack on the Ku Klux Klan: A Reassessment,” The South Carolina Historical Magazine 97 (1996): 57–58 Google Scholar; Moore, A Treatise on Extradition, 1:284; and “Case of Dr. Rufus Bratton,” 1872, RG 13-A-2, Vol. 27, No. 810, LAC.

41. “Dr. Bratton Released on $12,000 Bond—No Demand from the Dominion,” Edgefield Advertiser, July 11, 1872; “Release of Dr. Bratton's Bondsmen,” Yorkville Enquirer, November 14, 1872, 2; Martinez, J. Michael, Carpetbaggers, Calvary, and the Ku Klux Klan (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2007), 194 Google Scholar; and Geo H. Williams to D.J. Corbin, November 2, 1872, RG 13-A-2, Vol. 27, No. 810, LAC.

42. Edward Thornton to Hamilton Fish, October 11, 1872, RG 13-A-2, Vol. 27, No. 810, LAC; Fish to Thornton, November 12, 1872; and Williams, The Great South Carolina Ku Klux Klan Trials 1871–1872, 77.

43. McCrady, “Partitioning Sioux History,” 105.

44. W.T. Sherman to Headquarters Army of the United States, March 8, 1867, 70, United States, Department of State, Executive Documents, House of Representatives (Hereafter DSED HOR), 2nd Sess. 40th Cong., 1867–1868, University of Wisconsin Digital Collections (hereafter UWDC); Moore, A Treatise on Extradition, 1:121; George A. Paige to W. H. Waterman, “No 10,” July 8, 1865, 99–100, Office of Indian Affairs Annual Reports Online, UWDC; and González-Quiroga, Miguel Ángel, “Conflict and Cooperation in the Making of Texas-Mexico Border Society, 1840–1880,” in Bridging National Borders in North America, ed. Johnson, Benjamin H. and Graybill, Andrew R. (Durham: Duke University Press, 2010), 34–38 Google Scholar.

45. Alfred H. Terry to Brevet Brig. Gen. W.A. Nichols A.A.G., March 4, 1867, 69 in U.S. Department of State, Executive Documents Printed by Order of the House of Representatives, 2nd Sess., 40th Cong. 1867–1868, UWDC.

46. John McGee, “Copy of a Report of a Committee of the Honorable the Privy Council, Approved by His Excellency the Governor General in Council, on 24th April, 1882” in Canada, Department of Indian Affairs Annual Reports, 1882, xlv, LAC.

47. Graybill, Andrew R., Policing the Great Plains: Rangers, Mounties, and the North American Frontier 1875–1910 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2007), 39 Google Scholar; LaDow, Beth, The Medicine Line: Life and Death on a North American Borderland (New York: Routledge, 2001), 31 Google Scholar; and Harring, Sidney L., “Crow Dog's Case: A Chapter in the Legal History of Tribal Sovereignty,” American Indian Law Review 14 (1989): 191–239 Google Scholar.

48. United Kingdom, Parliament, “32–33 Victoria, C. 21 S 112 and 113,” in Anno Regni Victoriæ, Britanniarum Reginœ [Statutes of Canada] (Ottawa: Malcolm Cameron, 1869), 221–22Google Scholar.

49. McGee, “Copy of a Report of a Committee,” xlv; D. Laird to Secretary, Department of Indian Affairs, June 21, 1902, “Northwest Territories—Correspondence Regarding Vagrant American Sioux and an Outbreak of Smallpox amongst Straggling Chippewa and Cree Indians from the United States,” RG 10, Indian Affairs, Volume 3797, file 47,554-2, LAC; Hubner, Brian, “Horse Stealing and the Borderline: The NWMP and the Control of Indian Movement, 1874–1900,” Prairie Forum 20 (1995): 287, 293Google Scholar; McKenna, “Above the Blue Line,” 100–101; McManus, Sheila, The Line Which Separates: Race, Gender, and the Making of the Alberta-Montana Borderlands (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2005), 78 Google Scholar; and Barron, F. Laurie, “The Indian Pass System in the Canadian West 1882–1885,” Prairie Forum 13 (1988): 30 Google Scholar.

50. Burt, Larry, “Nowhere Left to Go: Montana's Crees, Metis, and Chippewa and the Creation of Rocky Boy's Reservation,” Great Plains Quarterly 1 (1987): 202–3Google Scholar; A.E. Forget to Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, September 22, 1896, 299, Department of Indian Affairs Annual Reports Online, LAC; and McCrady, David G., Living with Strangers: The Nineteenth-Century Sioux and the Canadian-American Borderlands (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2006), xviGoogle Scholar.

51. Hogue, Michel, “Between Race and Nation: The Creation of a Métis Borderland on the Northern Plains,” in Bridging National Borders in North American: Transnational and Comparative Histories, ed. Johnson, Benjamin H. and Graybill, Andrew R. (Durham: Duke University Press, 2010), 73 Google Scholar; Basson, Lauren L., “Savage Half-Breed, French Canadian or White US Citizen? Louis Riel and US Perceptions of Nation and Civilisation,” National Identities 7 (2005): 374–75Google Scholar.

52. Dominion of Canada, Parliament, Official Report of the Debates of the House of Commons of the Dominion of Canada Third Session- Sixth Parliament, vol. XXVIII (Ottawa: Brown Chamberlin, 1889), 1469 Google Scholar; Unterman, Katherine, “Boodle over the Border: Embezzlement and the Crisis of International Mobility, 1880–1890,” Journal of the Gilded and Progressive Era 11 (2012): 158–60, 188Google Scholar; and “A Bad Eminence,” Asheville Citizen, March 31, 1888, 2.

53. Unterman, “Boodle over the Border,” 160–61.

54. “Eno Will Continue an Exile,” Rock Island Daily Argus, March 10, 1891; “How to Breed Scoundrels,” The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, May 21, 1893, 4; and Unterman, “Boodle over the Border,” 170, 189.

55. Moore, John Bassett, A Treatise on Extradition and Interstate Rendition, vol. 2 (Boston: Boston Book Company, 1891), 978 Google Scholar; Barbour, Oliver L., Reports of Cases in Law and Equity Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, vol. XLI (Albany: W.C. Little, 1864), 45–50 Google Scholar; State of New York, Public Papers of David B. Hill, Governor (Albany: The Argus Company, Printers, 1886), 218–25Google Scholar; Unterman, “Boodle over the Border,” 178–83; Spear, Samuel T., “Extradition - the Case of Norton,” The Albany Law Journal: A Weekly Record of the Law and the Lawyers 31 (January 24, 1885): 66 Google Scholar; and “Untitled,” The Ward County Independent, October 21, 1909, 10.

56. “Capture of Brainerd, The St. Albans Ex-Bank President,” Burlington Weekly Free Press, September 11, 1885; “Untitled,” September 17, 1885, 2; Unterman, “Boodle over the Border,” 182–83.

57. State of New York, Public Papers of David B. Hill, Governor, 222.

58. Ker v. Illinois, 119 U.S. 436 (1886).

59. Ker v. Illinois; Williams, Sharon A., “Criminal Law—Jurisdiction—Illegal Arrest— Due Process—Violation of International Law,” Canadian Bar Review 53 (1975): 413–14Google Scholar; “United States Supreme Court Abstract,” The Albany Law Journal: A Weekly Record of the Law and the Lawyers 38 (1888): 13 Google Scholar; Ward, “Forcible Abduction Made Fashionable,” 488–89; and Semmelman, “Due Process, International Law, and Jurisdiction,” 520–23.

60. “Thomas C. Fields Dead: Another Member of the Tweed Ring Gone,” New York Times, January 26, 1885, 1; Ward, “Forcible Abduction Made Fashionable,” 490–91; Unterman, “Boodle over the Border,” 183–84; Siegal, “Individual Rights under Self-Executing Extradition,” 765; and Moore, A Treatise on Extradition 1: 233–234.

61. McIntosh, Dave, The Collectors: A History of Canadian Customs and Excise (Toronto: NC Press, 1984), 314 Google Scholar; Andreas, Peter, Smuggler Nation: How Illicit Trade Made America (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013), 177–82Google Scholar; and Shortt, Adam and Doughty, Arthur G., eds., Canada and Its Provinces, vol. VI (Toronto: Glasgow, Brooks, & Company, 1914), 351 Google Scholar.

62. “Again in the Toils: Theodore Faust Arrested at Chesaw for Robbery,” Greenwood Weekly Times, June 16, 1900, 3; “Outwitted the Officer: An American Sheriff Deprived His Prisoner in British Territory”; J.K. Johnson to Attorney General Victoria BC, “U.S. Prisoner Theodore Faust Claims British Protection,” September 16, 1898, Attorney General Records, T 0429 Microfilm BO 9319, Box 4, File 2, 646/98, BCA; “Held by Canada,” Daily Capital Journal, April 18, 1898; and “Arrested for Robbery,” Boundary Creek Times, April 23, 1898, 14.

63. T. H. Whelan to L. Edwin Dudley, September 9, 1899, Despatches Vancouver vol. 2; Dudley to Hill, December 7, 1899; R. Newman to L. Edwin Dudley, August 11, 1899, Despatches Vancouver vol. 2; L. Edwin Dudley to David J. Hill, September 15, 1899, Despatches Vancouver vol. 2; Henry Waisman to U.S. Consul, September 11, 1899, Despatches Vancouver vol. 2; Dudley to Hill, December 7, 1899; and unsigned to David J. Hill, September 12, 1899, Despatches Vancouver vol. 2.

64. Waisman to U.S. Consul, September 11, 1899.

65. L. Edwin Dudley to David J. Hill, July 9, 1900, Despatches Vancouver vol. 3, NARA College Park; Newman to Dudley, August 11, 1899; M.E. Jesseph and Joseph McDonald to Edwin Dudley, September 10, 1899, Despatches Vancouver vol. 2; Edwin Dudley to David Hill, October 31, 1899, Despatches Vancouver vol. 2; and Dudley to Hill, December 7, 1899.

66. Dudley to Hill, September 15, 1899.

67. Alec Macintyre to L. Edwin Dudley, “Regina Vs Everett,” May 7, 1900, Despatches Vancouver vol. 3; “The Everett Case,” The News Advertiser, May 6, 1900, RG 59, Despatches from U.S. Consuls in Vancouver, T114, Volume 3, Reel 3, NARA College Park; and Dudley to Hill, December 7, 1899.

68. Dudley to Hill, “Kidnapping from the State of Washington And Bringing Prisoners to B.C.”; George Renolds to Consul, May 8, 1900, Despatches Vancouver vol. 3; L Edwin Dudley to David J. Hill, June 22, 1900, Despatches Vancouver vol. 3; and “James Wilson,” June 4, 1898, GR 0309, B11364, New Westminster Gaol Records 1859–1914, BCA.

69. L. Edwin Dudley to David J. Hill, Oct. 6, 1900, Despatches Vancouver vol. 3.

70. Unterman, Uncle Sam's Policemen, 100.

71. Abductions in the twentieth century occurred for many of the same reasons that they had during the nineteenth century. They impacted First Nations, deserters, and common criminals alike and continued to lead to inconsistent results. Supreme Court of Minnesota, State v. Porter 144 N.W. 2d 260 (1966); Kasinsky, Renée G., “Fugitives from Injustice: Vietnam War Draft Dodgers and Deserters in British Columbia,” in The Borderlands of the American and Canadian Wests: Essays on Regional History of the Forty-Ninth Parallel, ed. Evans, Sterling (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2006), 270–74Google Scholar; “U.S. Frees a Deserter After Canada Protests,” New York Times, August 31, 1974, 10; Gluck, Jonathan A., “The Customary International Law of State-Sponsored International Abduction and United States Courts,” Duke Law Journal 44 (1994): 636 Google Scholar; United States v. Lazore, 90 F. Supp. 2d 202 (N.D.N.Y. 2000); Schwabach and Patchett, “Doctrine or Dictum,” 48; Corbett, William H. and Kleiboemer, Axel, “United States Supreme Court: Brief of the Government of Canada as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondent in United States v. Alvarez-Machain,” International Legal Materials 31 (1992): 926–30Google Scholar; Abramovsky, Abraham, “Extraterritorial Abductions: America's ‘Catch and Snatch’ Policy Run Amok,” Virginia Journal of International Law 31 (1990/1991): 204 Google Scholar; and Hernández, Kelly Lytle, Migra!: A History of the U.S. Border Patrol (Berkley: University of California Press, 2010)Google Scholar.