"This Department is, however, disposed to regard the Colombian measures as extreme and at variance with the usages of civilized nations, not to speak of the transit question involved. "The mails are, as we are informed, now being sent to Chile via Buenos Ayres." Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Walker, chargé at Bogota, April 17, 1888, For. Rel. 1888, I. 422. See, to the same effect, Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Roberts, min. to Chile, April 17, 1888, For. Rel. 1888, I. 194. See also Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Maury, min. to Colombia, Jan. 11, 1888, For. Rel. 1888, I. 408; Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to the Postmaster-General, April 10, 1888, 168 MS. Dom. Let. 21. "I have received and duly considered your letter of the 10th instant, invoking, on behalf of the Panana Railroad Company, the further intervention of the Government of the United States with that of Colombia to cause the relaxation of the quarantine regulations of the Department of Panama so as to permit the conveyance in transit of freight from the so-called infected ports' of Europe. "This Department has gone as far as the proper protection of the national and commercial interests of the United States demanded and warranted in representing the extraordinary hardships inflicted on the commerce of this country by excluding its vessels from entry into the isthmian ports, when nothing in the sanitary condition of the ports of the United States could justify such treatment on the assumption that they were infected with Asiatic cholera. In this it has happily been successful. "As regards the maritime commerce of the isthmian ports with European countries, this Department has not the same latitude and right of original protest which it possesses in respect to commerce of American origin. The rigid measures imposed in the United States against European communications rested necessarily on the ascertained fact that many of the most important ports of the Continent were infected with epidemic cholera; and we could not urge the Government of Colombia to show less concern at the existence of the disease in such ports as Hamburg and Havre, nor assume the defence of European exporting interests, on the ground that an American corporation comes in for a share of the hardship occasioned by sanitary measures applied to the commerce of those countries. As you state it, the existing restrictions are injurious to the Panama Railroad Company in so far as they prevent the entry into the isthmian ports of vessels bringing freight from infected ports.' If applied to freight from European ports known to be infected, and so regarded by our own quarantine administrations, this Government could not consistently remonstrate, "The treaty stipulations between the United States and Colombia relative to the uninterrupted neutrality of the Isthmus of Panama as an avenue of interoceanic transit do not strike one as pertinent to the present aspects of the question. "There remains the practical suggestion that, under the terms of its contract with Colombia, your company is competent to maintain a local system of quarantine at the ports of the Department of Panama, and to enforce, at its own expense, such sanitary measures as may be adopted in cooperation with the Colombian Government. I have already brought this aspect of the problem to the notice of the Colombian Government in a telegraphic instruction to Mr. Abbott; and if you so desire I shall take pleasure in further supporting it by sending to Consul-General Adamson a copy of your letter and of this reply, and instructing him to intimate the pleasure this Government would feel were the friendly proposals of your corporation found adequate to provide such adequate and usual sanitary measures of local precaution and prevention as would remove the danger of infection through commerce with any cholera ports." 66 Mr. Wharton, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Lauterbach, Oct. 13, 1892, 188 Mr. Adamson was afterwards so instructed. (Mr. Wharton, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Lauterbach, Oct. 22, 1892, 188 MS. Dom. Let. 604. See, also, Mr. Cridler, 3rd Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Snyder, Oct. 30, 1897, 222 MS. Dom. Let. 115. The measures taken by the Government in 1892 to protect the towns on the Atlantic coast from contagion from the Asiatic cholera by the closure of the ports against vessels proceeding from infected or suspicious places, caused the U. S. Government to claim that their vessels should be exempted from such a measure, and claiming, with justice, that the epidemic had not declared itself in any part of the United States. "The home office having resolved to empower the authorities on the coast to decide each case on its own merits, the press of this capital and of other places declared the closure to have been stopped in favor of the United States on account of the Government at Washington having declared its intention of opening our ports by force. It was evident that this false report tended to diminish the cordiality cultivated by the United States with Colombia, as it made the Government. of that country appear to ignore the sovereignty of the Republic in the most flagrant manner; and it was also evident that it made this Republic appear to be insensible to so great an insult, and to tolerate the violation of her most sacred rights. For these reasons it was necessary to rectify these assertions, and to this end a note was passed to the American legation in this city, in which, having explained the causes thereof, it was asked whether the President of the Union had given any order resembling that which had appeared in the public papers. The representative of the United States certified not only that such orders had not been communicated to the legation, but that having asked the Secretary of State whether any such orders had been transmitted to any agent of their Government, it had received an answer in the negative." Report of the Colombian Minister of Foreign Affairs, 1894, For. Rel. 1894, 197. The laws of South American countries contain very strict provisions against the disinterment, within certain terms, of persons who have died of certain diseases. (Mr. Day, Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Wilson, Oct. 22, 1897, 221, MS. Dom. 615.) In September, 1893, the United States legation at Lisbon was instructed: "Protest earnestly against groundlessness and injustice of decree declaring ports of New York and New Jersey infected. Rigid quarantine exists and general health excellent. Last death at New York quarantine August 12, and last case August 13; no cholera there or elsewhere in the United States." Mr. Gresham, Sec. of State, to Mr. Caruth, min. to Portugal, Sept. 19, 1893, MS. Inst. Portugal, XVI. 36. "I have the honor, by order of my Government, to submit the following for your information: "The American quarantine and immigration acts of February 15 and March 3 of last year, respectively, and the regulations issued by the Treasury Department for carrying these into effect, contain certain provisions which, in the opinion of the Imperial Government, are not exactly compatible with the sovereign rights of foreign states. This is especially the case-referring only to the salient points-(1) with the provision of the quarantine act whereby the American consul of the port of departure, or the American medical officer specially detailed there for that purpose, shall, before he issues a bill of health, in order to verify that the facts therein stated are true, make an inspection of the crew, passengers, and cargo, etc., before the vessel's departure. The officer making the inspection is further authorized by the quarantine regulations, based upon the quarantine act, to order the disinfection of the vessel and such other sanitary measures on board as he considers necessary. "By these and similar provisions American consuls and medical officers at European ports of departure are given authority to act officially toward vessels clearing therefrom, for which no foundation exists either in generally recognized international maxims or even— with respect to Germany-in the consular convention of December 11, 1871. Concerning the inspection of vessels and their equipments, the examination of the crew and passengers, and the supervision of measures for disinfection, German regulations exist in German ports, which are most conscientiously carried out by the German authorities. "While, as is seen from the above statements, the duties of American consuls and medical officers in German ports do not appear to be founded upon international rules, the apprehension, furthermore, is not to be dismissed, that the working, side by side, of the German (official) sanitary authorities with American consuls and physicians might create confusion and apparently unnecessary impediments in intercourse. "(2) In like manner the provision of the American immigration act does not appear reconcilable with the law of nations where it provides that the lists prescribed, in which a number of dates concerning the emigrants are to be given, must be sworn to by the master or an officer or the physician of the vessel before the American consul at the port of departure. In the opinion of the Imperial Government the administering of oaths is an authoritative act which can not be performed without the sanction of the government of the country in the territory of which the oath is administered by the foreigner. "An American consul, therefore, except with reference to American citizens, is not deemed authorized to perform such an act without first obtaining the sanction of the German authorities. "For the above reasons the Imperial Government considers it its duty to enter a protest against the provisions of the American quarantine and immigration acts of February 15 and March 3, 1893, so far as they encroach upon the [rights of] sovereignty of the German Empire. While the Imperial Government at present restricts itself to a defense in principle of its position, it must in the future reserve the right, on befitting occasions, to oppose American consuls and medical officers on German territory with reference to German ships. "Requesting that your excellency will be good enough to advise me of his views on the subject above set forth, I avail myself also of this occasion," etc. Baron Saurma, German embassy, to Mr. Gresham, Sec. of State, Dec. 17, 1894, For. Rel. 1895, I. 511. "I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of December 17, 1894, calling attention to certain provisions of the quarantine and immigration laws and regulations of the United States which, in the opinion of your Government, are not consistent with the principles of international law, nor with any treaty between this Government and the German Empire. The laws and regulations against which your Government's objections are especially directed are: "(1) The provisions of the quarantine act of February 15, 1893, and the regulations made in pursuance of it, which require the con sular or medical officer of the United States stationed in a foreign port to inspect vessels of all nationalities' departing for the United States, and the crews, passengers, and cargoes. "(2) The provisions of the same act and regulations which empower the consular or medical officer to order the disinfection of such vessels, and in other respects to regulate their internal condition and arrangement, before granting the bill of health required for the entry of the vessel in a port of the United States. "(3) The provisions of the immigration act of March 3, 1893, which require that the master and surgeon of any vessel carrying immigrants to the United States shall present to the American consular officer at the port of departure descriptive lists of the immigrants, verified by the oaths of the master and surgeon taken before such officer. Your Government regards the exercise of these administrative functions by our consular and medical officers in Germany in connection with ships that are not American as unauthorized and in disregard of its sovereignty. The United States have an extensive seaboard open on both oceans to the introduction of infectious and contagious diseases from Europe and Asia and Central and South America. To avert this danger a rigid system of maritime sanitation has been provided. It is set forth and explained in a pamphlet published by the Treasury Department. I append a copy for your examination. The regulations to be observed at ports of the United States are printed on pages 24 and following. It will be seen that they provide for the inspection, quarantine, and disinfection of vessels after arrival at American ports, but before entry and discharge of passengers, cargo, and crew. “All vessels are required to be inspected before entry in order that it may be known on arrival whether or not they are in fit sanitary condition to enter our ports. The conditions which require detention in quarantine are specified. It will be noticed that compliance with the regulations to be observed in foreign ports may, and in practice often does, avert or shorten quarantine at the port of arrival; and the same is true in regard to disinfection. "The United States have in operation in their own jurisdiction a complete and adequate system of safeguards against the introduction of disease from foreign countries, and are not dependent upon precautions taken abroad; but it has been our policy to effect this purpose of keeping out disease with as little hindrance as possible to commercial intercourse with foreign countries, and with the least inconvenience and expense to incoming ships. To this end provision has been made for taking measures at the port of departure which will enable a vessel to enter our ports with an authentic sanitary record, |