Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-04-16

sons as follows: w
This Government supposes that the
rights Of the Spanish Consul, public Off.
Ger residing here under the protection Of
lhe United States Government, are unite
aiherent from those of the Spanish sub.
gects who have como into the country 10
mingie with our own citizens. and here TO
pursue their private business and objects.
Inc former may claim special indemnity ;
the latter are entitled TO such protection as
Is ahorded to our own citizens.
An AIIENs RIGHTS.
While, therefore, the losses of indi-
yiduals. private Spanish subjects. arc
greatly 70 be regretted. yet it is to be un-
derstood that many American citizens
suffered equal losses from the same cause ;
and those private individuals. subjects of
Her Catholic Majesty, coming voluntarily
10 reside in the United States. have GER
tainly no cause Of complaint IL they are
protected by the same laws and the same
administration of the law as native born
citizens Of this country. They have in
fact some advantages over citizens of the
State in which they happen 10 be. mas
much as they are enabled until they be-
come citizens themselves to prosecute for
any injuries done to their persons OF prop
erty IN the courts of the United States, or
MAosAEIMous AMERICA.
II is proper, however, TO add that two
years after MIR. Webster wrote the forego-
ing note, Congress, in recognition of GER
tam magnanimous conduct on the part OF
the Queen of Spain in pardons bestowed
on Americans who had uniustifably in
vaded the Island of Cuba, enacted Joint
resolution. approved by President Fill
more March 8, 1853. last day of his term,
indemnifyinR the Spanish Consul and
other Spanish subjects for losses sustained
in the New Orleans mob in 1851. The con-
siderations upon which this resolution was
passed were held not TO eontravene the
original position of Mr.. Webster, shared
also by President Fillmore.
THE JUDICIAL REMEDY.
The right to judicial remedy which Mr..
Webster assured to the Spanish subjects ia
likewise assured to the Italian subjects
The right is especially guaranteed in the
second section of the third article of the
Constitution, and, as Mr.. Webster points
out, the resident alien has a privilege
which Is denied 10 the citizen. The
widows and children of the citizens who
lost their lives by mob violence may sue
the leaders and members of the mob only
in the courts of tho State of Louisiana.
while the widows and children OF the
the right TO sue each member Of the mob,
not only in the State courts, but also be-
fore the Federal tribunals for the district
of Louisiana. Provision is made in the
revised civil code of Louisiana for redress
of such grievances as the widows and
children of the victims may plead.
quote:
THE CODE OF REDRESS.
ARTICLE 2314. Every act, whatever OF
man that causes damage TO another,
obliges him by whose fault it happened to
repair it. The right of this action shall
survive in case of death In favor of the
MINOR children and widow Of the deceased,
or either of them and in default of these
in favor of the surviving father and mother,
or either Of them, for the space of one year
from the DEATH
Article 2316. Every person is response
BILE for the damage he occasions, not
merely by his act. but by his negligence,
his imprudence, or his want Of skill"
Article 1924. He who causes another
person to do an unlawful act, or assists or
encourages in the commission of it, is
answerable in sotdo with that person tor
the damage caused by such act"
THE CONFLICTS COMPARED.
The Government of the United States
would feel justified in resting on the
argument and conclusion of MIR. Webster.
il the mob OF March IL, 1891, did not in
some of its characteristics differ from the
mob of 1851. But il is due to entire candor,
due 10 this Government, and due to the
Government of Italy. 20 point out certain
differences Of which the Government OF
the United States is honorably bound TO
take notice.
THE ISSUE IN 1851.
In the case of the mob of 1851, Mr.. Web
ster asserts that mo personal injury was
offered to any one; that the police and
other legal authorities did all that was
possible to preserve peace and arrest the
riotersn: that "the mob acted in the heat
of blood and not in pursuance OF any de-
termined plan or purpose of injury or
insult -: that "the mob was composed of
irresponsible persons. the names OF none
of whom are known to the government OF
the United States, nor so far as the Gov
ernment is informed. to its officers or
agents in New Orleans"
THE ISSUE IN 1891.
As promptly as possible after the lament
able occurrence at New Orleans, the Presi-
dent directed the Attorney-General to
cause through his Department full In
ouiry 10 be made into all facts connected
herewith, and solicited his opinion
whether any criminal proceedings would
courts against persons charged with the
killing OF Italian subjects.
He has not yet received the official re-
port. If il be found that prosecution can
DO maintained under the statutes OF the
limited States the case will be presented to
the next grand jury according to the
usual methods of criminal administration.
But if 1t shall be found, as seems probable,
that criminal proceedings can only be
taken in the courts of Louisiana, the Fres-
ident can in this direction do no more than
to urre upon the State officials the duty OF
bringing the offenders to trial.
This was done in his telegram 20 the
Governor of Louisiana as early as the 10Th
of March.
THE STATE COURTS.
If IL shall result that the case can be
only in the State courts OF
Louisiana, and the usual judicial lnvestl;
cation and procedure under the criminal
law is not resorted to, it will then be the
duty of the United States to consider
whether some other form OF redress may
be asked.
;urv is now investigating the affair, and
while IL is possible that the jury may tall
TO present indictments the United States
cannot assume that such will be the case.
NOT AN INSURANCE COMPANY.
The United States did not by the treaty
with italy become the insurer OF the lives
or property Of Italian subjects resident
within our territory. No government IS
able. however high its civilization, how
ever yieilant its police supervision, how
aver severe its criminal code, and however
prompt and lnhexible its criminal admin.
stration, 10 secure ITS own citizens AGAINST
promoted by Individual malice OF
bv sudden popular tumult. The foreign
resident must be content in such cases 10
,hsre the redress that is offered by the law
10 the citizen, and has no Just cause Oh
or right TO ask the interposiu0n
of his country il the courts are equally
1pen TO him for the redress OF his injuries
A CITIZENS RIGHTS LIMITED.
The treaty in the first, second, third, ana
notably in the twenty-third article clearly
limits the right guaranteed TO the cltizens
n the contracting powers In the territory
Il each 70 equal treatment and TO Tree
,ccess 10 the courts of justice; Foreign
residents are not made q favored class. AZ
q NOT believed that Italy would desire
more stringent construction OF her duty
snder the treaty. Where the injury IN
q y 4 = \ ...,.,, a foya5on resident 1s not the