The McCook tribune., 1891-04-24
the general subject DC submitted to the

| the general SUBJECT DC submitted TO the
| judgment OF the Italian government.
AS precedent OF great value in the
case under discussion the president re-
calls the conclusion maintained by
Webster when secretary OF state IN
1851. In August of that year mob
in New Orleans demolished the build
ing in which the Office OF the Spanish
| consul was located, and ut the same
time attacks were made upon coffee
| houses and cigar shops kept by Span
| ism subjects. American citizens were
| involved in the losses, which in the
| aggregate were large. The supposed
cause of the mob was intelligence OF
the execution of fifty young Americans
| in Havana and the baniShment TO
Spanish mines of nearly two hundred
citizens of the United States. Inc
victims were all members OF the abor-
tive Lopez expedition. In consequence
OF these depredations OF the mob upon
the property of the Spanish consul as
well as against Spanish subjects. Don
Calderon de Laparza, minister, de-
manded indemnifcation for all losses,
both official and personal. Webster
admitted that the Spanish consul was
entitled to indemnity and assured the
Spanish minister that .if the injured
consul, MIR. Laborde, shall return TO
his post, or any other consul for New
Orleans be appointed by her Catholic
majestys government. the officers of
this government resident in that city
will be instructed to receive and treat
him with courtesy and with the ma
tional salute to the flag OF his ship if
he shall arrive in Il Spanish vessel as
Il demonstration OF respect such as
may signify TO him and TO his govern
ment the sense entertained by the gov
ernment OF the United States of the
gross injustice done to his predecessor
bv Il lawless mob as well as indemnity
for the insult offered by it to q foreign
state with which the United States are
and wish ever to remain on terms OF
the most respectful and pacific inter-
course" But when pressed by the
Spanish minister to afford indemnity
to the Spanish subjects injured by the
mob in common with American citi-
zens, Webster declined to acceGe TO
the demands, and gave his reasons us
follows: This government supposes
that the rights of the Spanish consul
4 public officer residing here under the
protection of the United States govern
ment are quite different from those of
Spanish subjects, who have come into
our country to mingle with our own
citizens and are here to pursue their
private business and objects. The for
mer may claim special indemnity; the
latter are entitled to such protection
rs is afforded to our own citizens.
While. therefore, losses to individuals,
private Spanish subjects. are greatly
to be regretted, yet it is understood
that many American citizens suf-
fered equal losses from the same
cause, and those private
individuals, subjects of her Catholic
majesty. coming voluntarily to reside
in the United States, have certainly no
cause to com plain if they are protected
by the same laws and the administra-
tion Of the law as the native born citi-
zens Of this country. They have, in
fact some advantages over Il citizen OF
the state in which they happen to be.
inasmuch as they are enabled under it
to become citizens themselves, to pro-
secute for any injuries done to their
persons or property in the courts of
the United States or state courts ut
their election" Two years after Web
ster wrote the foregoing note congress,
in recognition of certain magnanimous
conduct on the part of the queen of
Spain in pardons bestowed upon Amer
leans who had unj justifiably invaded
the island OF Cuba, enacted Il joint res
olution indemnifying the Spanish con-
sui and other Spanish subjects for the
losses sustained in the New Orleans
MOB of 1851. The considerations upon
which this resolution was passed were
such as to cOntravent the original posi- |
tiOn of Webster, shaded also by Pres;- |
dent Fillmore. The right TO judicial |!
remedy which Webster assured TO
Spanish subjects is likewise assured to
Italian subjects. The right is specially |
guaranteed in the second section of the
third article OF the constitution. And |
DIS w eOSler points OUT, feSlOenL allen /
has Il privilege which is denied TO Il
citizen. The widows and children of !
citizens who lose their lives by mob |
violence may sue the leaders !
and members Of the mob only |
in the courts Of the state of Louisi- |
ana, while the widows and children of .
the Italian subjects who suffered death /
have Il right TO sue each member OF ,
the mob, not only III the state courts, !
but also before the federal tribunals /
for the district of louisiana Pro- !
vision is MADE in the revised civil code .
of Louisiana for the redress of such |
grievances us the widows and children /
of the victims Of Il mob may plead. /
1Blaine here quotes from the statutes /
of Louisiana. and continues. The /
government of the United States would I.
feel justified in resting on the argu- !
ment ana conclusion of Webster if the I
MOB of March II. 1891. did not in /
some of its characteristics differ from /.
the mob OF 1851. But it is due TO can
dor, due TO this government and Cue .
TO the government OF Italy 10 point /
out certain differences OF which the !
rovarprapt of the I-DitaG STATES i (