The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1886-08-12
A DIPLOMATIC BLUNDER.

A disclosure of an unheard-of and unex-
plainable diplomatic blunder on the part of
our State Department in connection with the
Cutting case has placed our Government in
a very notifying position. Had the dis
covery occurred at any other time than in
the dying hours of Congress when attention
was naturally attracted to domestic matters
it would have been difficult to suppress the
profound indignation that would have fol-
lowed such trifling.
1t will be remembered that the House
Committee on Foreign Affairs unanimously
reported a resolution sustaining the Secre-
tary of State in an imperative demand in
the name of this Government for the release
of Cutting. This action was based upon
letter from Mr.. Bayard to the committee,
which began by saying that no better way
of stating the situation was apparent than
brief review of the correspondence be-
tween the two Governments in relation to
the matter. Then followed what purported
to be summary Of each letter, showing
that the NIexicans had refused this man
bail, had thrown him into q dungeon, had
set up the claim that they had the right to
try citizen of this Government upon q
charge of crime committed within our own
jurisdiction, etc, upon which state of facts
he had demanded the release of Cutting
forthwith, and the Mexican Government had
refused to comply.
Upon this statement the committee acted.
The next day the correspondence itself,
which had been transmitted to the House,
was printed, and, to the astonishment
of those who read it, it was discovered
that the protested brief in Mr.. Bay
ards letter had completely perverted
and inverted the correspondence. The
Mexican Government had not refused Cut
ting bail, but it came out that the Chief
Justice of the State, where he was under
arrest, had made journey in person of 800
miles to see him, and urged him to take bail,
and that he had refused on the ground that
he would have better case for damages
against Mexico in future by so doing. 1t
was shown that instead of being belligerent
or insolent, the very first communication
from the Mexican authorities had been of an
exceedingly eonciliatory nature, and had
continued SO to the end. President Diaz
had gone ont of his way to interest himself
in the case, although he had no more au-
thOrity to order Cuttings release than has
President Cleveland to command Circuit
Judge of the State of Pennsylvania to turn
prisoner loose. The Governor of Chihua-
hua had given the matter special attention,
and, as above stated, the Chief Justice had
gone in person to see that no hardship should
be inflicted on this man. He was offered
any comfort he wanted, which was haughtily
declined, and he was given FIVE mems rations.
The much-mooted subject of the claim of
| the right to try an American for a crime
committed on American soil it was found
was nowhere alluded to in the correspond
ence between the two Governments, by either
side in the most remote manner.
In short, the whole matter collapsed and
Congress dropped the subject like hot
ember through the vehicle of a motion to
take recess to cut short the debate, wherein
the humiliating facts were pointed out by
Mr.. Hit, of Illinois, who had himself signed
the resolution under the transformation
conveyed in Mr.. Bayard's letter. 1t was APP
parent to all, without regard to party, that
the less said about the matter the better.