Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-12-15


valued citizens of the United States.
1t is not believed by the President that
a doctrine and practice so destructive
Of religious liberty and freedom Of con-
science, so devoid of catholicity. and 80
opposed to the spirit Of the age in which
we live, can for moment be accepted
by the great family Of civilized nations
or be allowed to control their diplo-
matte intercourse. Certain it is it will
never, in my belief, be accepted by the
people of the United States, nor by any
Administration which represents their
sentiments. Permit me, therefore, be-
ing animated only by the sincerest de-
sire to strengthen the ties Of friendship
and mutual respect between the Gov
ernments we respectively represent, aud
most earnestly and respectfully to
crave careful consideration Of this
note, and to request your Gov
eminent to- reconsider the views
you have communicated to me in re-
spect Of the possible reception Of Mr..
Kelley on mission Of amity and mu-
tual advantage which in the amplest
good faith he was selected by this Gov
eminent to perform. Into the religious
belief Of its Envoy or that Of any MEM
Der Of his family neither the Govern
ment nor any officer thereof, as I have
shown you, has any right or power to
inquire, or to apply any test whatever,
or to decide such question, and to do
so would constitute an infraction Of the
express letter and an invasion Of the per-
vading spirit Of the supreme law Of
this land.
While thus making a reply to the
only reason stated by your Govern
ment as the cause of its unreadiness to
receive Mr.. Kelley, permit me to also
remark that the President fully recog-
nizes the highly-important and un-
doubted right Of every Government to
decide for itself whether the indi-
vidual presented as the Envoy of
another State is, or is not, an
acceptable person, and in the exercise
of its own high and friendly discretion
to receive or not the person so pre-
scented. This right, so freely accorded
by the United States to all other ma
tions, its Government would insist upon
should an occasion deemed to be proper
arise.
Accept, Baron, &c.
F. T. BAYARD.
To this communication Baron Schaef-
fer replied on May 10Th that he did not
feel authorized to discuss Mr.. Bayard's
arguments, but had transmitted them to
his Government, and he repeated his
friendly verbal request that Mr.. Kei-
ley might not reach Vienna before
confidential agreement as to his accept
ance."
On May Goth Mr.. Bayard wrote to
Baron Schaefier and presented the views
of this Government with respect to the
point which had been advanced by
Count Kalnoky in his dispatch of May
Sth, and which Mr.. Bayard had set
aside for a more convenient eXamina-
ton. In his telegram of objection
Count Kalnoky desired that the atten-
ton Of this Government should be di-
rected to what he designates as the
generally existing diplomatic practice,
to ask previously to any nomination of
a Minister abroad the consent of the
Government to which he is to be ac-
credited.
Mr.. Bayard says that careful
search of the annals of this Govern
ment discloses no case in which the ac-
ceptability of an Envoy from the United
States was inquired about or ascer-
tanned in advance of his appointment.
| lie adds that whilst such a practice
may prevail among the European States,
there are important reasons why, in
| this country, it should never have
been adopted, and why its adop-
ton would not be practicable or
wise, our system of frequently-oc
ring elections affording An opportunity
for change Of the agents and policy
of this Government. The facts that
change in these respects might render
it difficult or impossible to procure the
consent Of aforeign Government to the
appointment Of agents whose views
were in harmony with the latest pre-
vailing expression of public opinion
in this country; that the United
States does not employ the SER
vices of professional diplomats, and
has no titled or privileged class to
select from for the performance Of such
duties. and hence that it is constrained
to choose its representatives abroad
from those who have been bred to other
pursuits, are set forth by Mr.. Bayard
as among the controlling reasons against
the policy here suggested.
Mr.. Bayard calls attention to the
fact that he HAD at the earliest oppor-
tunity given notice Of Mr.. Keiley's ap-
pointment, and concludes with the hope
that the Emperor Of Austria will find
in the appointment of Mr.. Kelley no
sufficient ground to reject him in his
official character because his Majesty's
sanction had not been previously asked.
Mr.. John M. Francis, then United
States Minister at Vienna, on June
18th notified Mr.. Bayard that he had
been informed that the Austrian Foreign
Office had raised serious objections to
receiving Mr.. Kelley, because a friend
ly Governmental near neighbor-had
objected to him as the United States
representative at its court, and had
voiced its objections since the Presi-
dent had appointed Mr.. Kelley as
United States Minister to Austria.
''The alleged fact" Mr.. Francis writes,
! shat his wife was Jewess did not
influence the judgment Of his Majesty's
Government in the premises, for Aus
tria is tolerant and liberal in respect Of
religious matters, but it cannot pre-
scribe society usage which might be
unpleasant in that regard"
On June 30th Mr.. Francis commune
Gates to the State Department extracts
from the Vienna Nep Freie Press levi
IDENTIFY inspired by Count Kalnoky), in
which it is intimated that Austria re-
fuses to receive Z" the Virginia lawyer"
solely out of respect to Italy, and with
a view to evidencing the complete en-