The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1891-04-21

TO enforce the law against tne
leaders.
The State Department has al
ways maintained that the national
government cannot be held re.
sronsible to any foreign power for
the consequences of mob violence.
Alien, like citizen, sufferers must
look to the local courts for justice
and redress to which they may be
entitled.
But in standing on this principle
our government has always as
sumed that the local authorities
used at least due diligence to pre-
vent mob violence or to suppress
it and to punish the offenders. and
stress has been laid OH this fact III
maintaining the non responsibility
OF the national government. Thus
in the case of the anti-Chlnese
riot in Denver Secretary Evarts
wrote:-
The local. authorities brought into re-
QUESTION all the means at their com
mand for the suppres sion of the mob,
and these means proved 10 be 80 etfec-
tive that within twenty-iour hours regu-
lar and lawful authority was re estab
lished, the mob completely subdued and
many OF the ringleaders arrested. I'm
der circumstances OF this nature, when
the government has put forth every
legitimate effort to suppress a mob that
threatens or attacks alike the safety and
security of its own citizens and the for
eign residents within its borders know
| oi no principle OF interna ional obliga-
ton which renders il incum-
bent on the government Of the United
| States to make indemnity.
This was quoted with approval
by Secretary Blaine in continuing
the correspondence in the same
case, who further referred to the
successful efforts made by the Gov
ernor, the Mayor and the Sheriff
in quelling the riot.
In another case Secretary Evarts
admitted that ga government is
liable internationally for damages
done to .lien residents by mob
which by due diligence it could
have repressed," which view ac-
cords with the principle recently
affirmed by the United States
Supreme Court that
| The law OF nations requires every
national government TO Use " due dill
gence" to prevent wrong being done
within its own dominion to another ma.
ton with which it is at peace or to the
people thereof.
The popular uprising in New
Orleans was peculiar-is, in fact,
unparalleled-ln the respect that
it met with no official resistance. 1t
was openly and deliberately plan
ned and notice of it given in the
public prints. Yet neither the
Sheriff nor the Chief of Police,
neither the Mayor of the city nor
the Governor of the State, took
any steps to prevent it or to arrest
its progress. There was no show
of official resistance. On the con
trary. there was virtually official
acaulescence. The occurrence was
openly approved by the Mayor
and other officials. Nor has any
one who took part in the move
ment yet been arrested or in
dicted.
| Whether the uprising is justified
by the provocation, whether it i.
to be approved or condemned by
popular sentiment, the fact thai
the public authorities made no at
tempt to enforce the law is likely
to have an important bearing OIL
the international aspect of the
affair. Had due diligence been ex
erted to prevent or suppress the
violence, had the prime movers
been arrested and indicted, this
could be pleaded as a defence O
the nation to the charge of respOn
sibility. But what will Mr.. Blaine
say to the allegation of the Italian
government that the local authori
t es virtually acqdiesced IN the out
brevk2-[N. Y. Herald, March 81