Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

The matter was brought by the Department of State to the attention of the governor of California, who caused it to be investigated by the district attorney of Monterey County. The district attorney, in his report, said: "The acts of both Seeley and Morton must not be attributed to the citizens, and the latter surely disavow all blame for the deeds of Captain Seeley, an adventurous drillmaster of unknown and unbegrudged antecedents, and of Harry Morton, an extremist in the imbibing from the flowing bowl.” A copy of the district attorney's report was communicated to the Portuguese minister, with an expression of confidence that he would find in it abundant proof that the lawless act of which he had complained " in no wise represented the feelings of the law-abiding portion of the community.” The Department of State added: “ That no insult to the Portuguese Government could be intended is obvious when it is considered that Mr. Ortins, who displayed the flag, was himself a naturalized citizen of the United States, and as such had no right to fly the flag of the country of his origin for the distinctive purpose of protection or in assertion of any right claimable by him as a Portuguese subject. So far as his individual rights are concerned, he had a remedy at law against the guilty parties, but declined to lodge a complaint. These circumstances, however, do not exclude sincere regret for the occurrence and disavowal of sympathy therewith on the part of the reputable citizens of Monterey, which I have now the pleasure to express to you.

Mr. Adee, Acting Sec. of State, to Viscount de Santo-Thyrso, Portuguese

min., July 28, 1897, For Rel. 1897, 433. The Portuguese minister expressed the belief that these explanations

would be well received by his Government, and a copy of his note was communicated to the governor of California as closing the incident. (For. Rel. 1897, 434.)

Referring to the informal memorandum handed to the Assistant Secretary on the 25th of September last by Mr. von Mumm, touching the reported action of soldiers from the United States transport Sheridan in hauling down a German flag from the Orpheum Hotel, in Honolulu, I have the honor to advise you that I am now in receipt of a report from the Secretary of War, to whom I communicated the memorandum with a view to ascertaining what steps had been taken to discover and appropriately punish the authors of this act.

" From the report of the senior officer in command of the troops on board the Sheridan at the time of the occurrences complained of, it appears that a prompt investigation was made by him with a view to severely punishing such soldiers as might have been guilty of the offense charged; but that, notwithstanding all efforts, it was not possible to bring the charges home to the recruits concerned, owing to the inability of the authorities to fix their identity. It is deeply regretted that this untoward result should have defeated the desire and purpose of the responsible commander to inflict condign punishment on the offenders, and the Secretary of War, in communicating to me the report of the commander of the Sheridan, is pained that, under the circumstances, he can do no more in this instance than express reprobation of such disgraceful conduct on the part of men wearing the uniform of the United States and give assurance of the determination of the military authorities to severely punish such offenders when it is possible to ascertain their identity.”

Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Herr von Holleben, German ambassador, Janu

ary 25, 1900, MS. Notes to German Leg. XII. 398. See, also, Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. von Mumm, German embassy,

Oct. 21 and Oct. 23, 1899, MS. Notes to German Leg. XII. 361, 362.

(2) QL'ARANTINE.

$ 191.

In a letter to the governor of Pennsylvania, July 8, 1796, Mr.

Pickering, referring to the “ orders" which had General principles. “ been given on the subject of quarantine, agreeably to an act of Congress passed at their last session," enclosed a “copy of a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury showing what instructions have been given to the collectors of the customs, and the copy of a circular letter from the Secretary of War to the officers commanding the forts on the seacoast."

Mr. Pickering, Sec. of State, to the governor of Pennsylvania, July 8,

1796, 9 MS. Dom. Let. 202. July 8, 1803, Mr. Madison addressed a communication to the British and

French ministers, requesting them to take such measures as they might deem useful to lessen the inconveniences which American vessels might suffer on account of the vigorous precautions of quarantine” which had at times been exercised against American commerce in France and Great Britain. Mr. Madison observed that "the occasional prevalence of the yellow fever in some of the seaports of the United States" had “ sometimes produced ab 'oad apprehensions not justified by the local state and degree of the malady.” (Mr. Madison, Sec. of State, to Messrs. Thornton and Pichon, British and French ministers, July 8, 1803, 14 MS. Dom. Let. 169.)

“I have received information that measures, imposing serious restrictions on our navigation and commerce, are taking in the North of Europe, with a view to guard against the disorder called the yellow fever. It is represented that these restrictions are likely to be generally extended in that quarter through the means of a concert, promoted by one of the most influential powers, and it is probable that the government may be invited to adopt them. Should it yield to such solicitations, a source of injury will be opened affecting not only ourselves but the interest of ... , to whom the navigation of the United States, as a neutral nation entitled to and enjoying in a high degree the respect due to its flag, is of the greatest importance, whilst it would prove an unnecessary expedient, as far as respects the United States, for the prevention of the calamity for which it may be calculated.

“ In the circular letter from this Department to the consuls and commercial agents of the United States, dated 1st Aug. 1801, the injustice was noticed of indiscriminating prohibitions of intercourse with a country so extensive as the United States on account of the prevalence of this disease in an individual port, and it was also observed that in the winter months it was impossible it could be conveyed from the United States, as that season has been found uniformly to extinguish it. It may be added, that at the utmost a very slight examination by the health officers in the ... ports would ascertain whether any of our vessels were infected, as the infection could not fail, on account of the distance of the two countries, to manifest on their arrival the most unequivocal appearances, if it existed in them. But it is a fact highly encouraging to the prospect of a final exclusion and extinction of the malady in our ports, that of late years its recurrence has been less frequent, has affected fewer of them, and that its character of malignity and fatality has been mitigated; accordingly no disorder resembling it appeared during the last summer and autumn on any point of the seaboard north of Charleston, S. C., or if there were any such appearance it was too slight to claim attention, and some of the cities where its visitation was most apprehended escaped it the preceding year.

“ Copies of the circular referred to and its enclosure are enclosed, and you are requested to lose no time in explaining this subject to ... ministry. In particular you will furnish them with a copy of the letter of the Secretary of the Treasury respecting it, and assure them that its injunctions have been and will continue to be scrupulously observed."

Mr. Madison, Sec. of State, to United States ministers at Paris, London,

and Madrid, May 13, 1805, MS. Inst. to U. States Ministers, VI. 294. In the instruction to Gen. Armstrong, minister to France, there was added

the following sentence: “As the Bavarian Government may be in like manner requested to accede

to the restrictions in question, you will make similar explanation to

its minister at Paris." Mr. McLane, Secretary of State, in an instruction to Mr. Hammett, United

States consul at Naples, May 13, 1834, said that the boards of health in the principal cities of the United States had been advised to open correspondence with the board of health of Naples to induce the latter to abate the severity of its quarantine regulations. (5 MS. Desp. to Consuls, 311.)

"The tabular statement accompanying my report of the 18th ultimo to

the Senate contains a notice of French sanitary regulations requiring of all passengers, landing in France, individual bills of health, delivered by the French consul at the port of departure. From a French paper lately received at this Department, I extract the ordinance, of which the enclosed is a translation, and from which it appears that the regulation referred to is repealed. I communicate this information, that the proper correction may be made in the tabular statement from the Department, if it shall be thought necessary." (Mr. Forsyth, Sec. of State, to the Vice-President of the United States, Jan. 3, 1840, 30 MS. Dom. Let. 431.)

“ The French passenger steamer La France, of Marseilles, on December 30, 1885, entered the bay of Bahia, and being signaled to stop by the national gun-boat for the purpose of undergoing sanitary inspection before proceeding to her anchorage, disregarded the signal, whereupon the gun-boat fired two blank charges at her. This warning likewise receiving no attention, the fort of Gamboa gave her two shots, one of which struck her on the prow, killing a passenger, an Italian. The French Government, on behalf of the owners of La France, sent in a claim for damages caused by the cannon ball fired from the fort, and proposed to the Imperial Government that in the future the firing of ball be discontinued, substituting for this fines graded to suit the gravity of the case. It was alleged by the captain of the packet that the first signal was not given; that the two blank shots were supposed to come from a man-of-war at gun practice, and, finally, that his vessel had a clean bill of health, and did not come from an infected port. Brazil replied that the damage done the vessel and the death of the passenger were the result of systematic disobedience of port regulations on the part of commanders of foreign packets, and of utter disregard for the signals from the gun-boat, which were duly given in the case; that the only way to prevent the introduction of disease from foreign ports was to subject vessels coming from those ports to rigid inspection before entering the inner harbor, and the only way to compel them to stop, when they disregarded the signals, was to fire on them with shot. The claim of the Italian Government in behalf of the family of the passenger killed was likewise rejected. Claims made by English companies for firing upon their vessels under circumstances similar to the above were not entertained by the foreign office."

Mr. Trail, chargé at Rio de Janeiro, to Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, Jan. 21,

1887, For. Rel. 1887, 54, 55. In 1893 the Italian Government obtained an award of damages, in behalf

of an Italian subject, named Lavarello, against the Government of Portugal, for the arbitrary and illegal application of quarantine measures at ('ape Verde in August, 1884, while cholera was prevalent in certain European ports. (Moore, Int. Arbitrations, V. 5021 et seq.)

"I have received advices from Messrs. Miller, Bull and Co., of New York, agents of the New York and Porto Rico Steamship Company, that the Spanish consul at the port of New York refuses to clear the steamship Rannock, carrying freight only, or any other vessel for the island of Puerto Rico, until twenty days after the last case or suspected case of cholera at New York. The consul states that he thus acts in conformity with cabled instructions from the governorgeneral of Puerto Rico. The Rannock, being laden and ready for sea, has been thus detained for several days.

“The question thus presented goes far beyond that of the onerous quarantine, whether of observation or of sanitary detention, imposed at Mariel upon vessels from any port of the United States to any port of Cuba, which has called forth my rocent notes to Señor Sagrario. The action of the governor-general of Porto Rico and of the Spanish consul at New York is in fact a complete inhibition for the time being upon commerce between the port of New York and the island of Puerto Rico. Indeed it may be regarded as going still further and imposing preventive detention at the will of the authorities of Puerto Rico, in a foreign jurisdiction.

“I have already had the honor to apprise your legation of the sanitary condition of the ports of this country, and I now beg to repeat my statements and to request that you will use your good offices with the governor-general of Puerto Rico to remove the wholly needless and exaggerated embargo upon commerce between the United States and that island. To the reasonable enforcement of local observation in the country of destination, and of quarantine when the conditions of the particular vessel and voyage may require it, this Government can have no objection. But the reported measure in respect to Puerto Rico is not quarantine, it is absolute nonintercourse."

Mr. Foster, Sec. of State, to Señor Don Enrique Dupuy de Lome, Span.

min., Oct. 1, 1892, MS. Notes to Spain, X. 669.

"A copy of your No. 92, of the 1st ultimo, concerning the entire closure of the Pacific Isthmus ports against vessels coming from Chile, having been inclosed to the Postmaster-General, I now state in substance his views in regard to the question.

“While this is the first instance known to the Post-Office Department of an absolute exclusion of the mails as a sanitary measure, yet it is to be observed that the ordinary precautions of disinfection, etc., have never proved entirely effective as regards cholera, and therefore, despite the inconvenience caused by the action of the Colombian Government, the Postmaster-General is of opinion that we will have no tenable ground of complaint if the ports are opened as soon as the danger of infection ceases.

H. Doc. 551_vol 2-10

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »