The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1891-04-22

on terms OF the most rSSDecLkQl anu
pacific intercourse"
But when pressed by the Spanish minister to
afford indemnity TO Spanish subjects injured
by the mob, in common with American cit-
Lens. Mr.. Webster declined, and gave his
reasons, as follows: This government sup
poses that the rights OF the Spanish consul,
public officer residing here under the protec-
ton OF the U. ;. government are
quite different from those OF the Spanish sub
jects who have come into the country to min
gle with our own citizens and here to pursue
their private business aud objects. The former
may claim special indemnity; the latter are
entitled to such protection as is granted TO
our own citizens. While, therefore, the
losses OF individuals, private Spanish subjects,
are greatly to Oe regretted, yet it is understood
that many American citizens suffered equal
Losses from the same cause, and these private
individuals, subjects OF her catholic majesty,
coming voluntarily 10 reside in the United
States, have certainly no cause of com plant If
they are protected by the same laws and the
same administration OF law as natve-boTn
citizens OF this country. They have, in fact,
some advantages over citizens OF the state in
which they happen to be, inssmuch a. they are
enabled until they become citizens themselves,
TO prosecute for any injuries done to their per-
sons their properly In the courts of the
United States or the state courts at their cleo
ton"
It is proper however 10 add tina. two years
after Mr.. Webster wrote the foregoing note
congress In recognition of certain magnanimous
cJuduct on the part OF the queen of Spain on
pardons bestowed on Americans who had I'M
justihably invaded the island of Cuba, enacted
q joint resolution, approved by President Fill
more March 8. 1883, the last day of his term.
indemnifying the Spanish consul and other
Spanish subjects for the losses sustained in the
New Orleans mob OF 1851. The considerat ons
held not TO cOn,ravene the original position OF
Mr.. Webster, shared also by President Fill
more.
The right to judicial remedy which Mr..
Webster assured 10 the spanish subjects is
likewise assured to the Italian subj, c,s. The
right is specially guaranteed in the second
section OF third article OF the constitution.
And, rs Mr.. Webster points out, the resident
alien has privilege which is denied to the
citizen. The widows and children of the ciIi-
zens who lost their lives by mob violence may
sue the leaders and members of the mob on y
In the courts OF the state OF Louisiana; while
the widows and children of the Italian subjects
who u iered death, have the right to sue eech
member of the mob, not only in the state
courts, but also before the federal tribunals Tor
ths district OF Louisiana.
Provision Is made in the revised civil code OF
Louisiana 70: redress of such grievances the
widows and children OF the victims of the mob
may plead. quote:
"Art. 2,3l4. Every act, whatever, of man that
causes damage to another Oblges him by
whose fault i happened to repair il. 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 ~ favor Of the surviving father or moth
er, or either of them, for the space of enc year
from the death"
"Arf. oslo. Every person ia responsihle for
the damage be occasions, not merely By his
act blu; By MS :sliceaes. his Inpradencs or
bis want OF skill"
Article ,, S24.-He who causes another per-
son to dc 81 unlawful act. or assists or encour-
ages in the commission OF il, is onswerable IN
soiido with that person for the damage caused
by such act"
The government Of the United States would
feel justified IN resting the argument and
Conclusion of Mr.. Webster il the MOB Of March
Il, 1891, did not IN some OF Its cEarGo .eristicS
diter from the mob oil 1851. But il is due TO en-
tire candOr, due TO this Vcyerument and due to
the government Of Italy 10 point out certain
differences of which the government of the
United States is honorably bound to take
notice.
In the case Of the mob OF 1851 Mr.. Webster
asserts that mo personal injury was offered to
any one; that the police and other legal author.
ties did oil t! o. was possible to preserve the
peace and arrest the rioters that ;iie mob acted
in the heat of blood and not in Pursuance Of
any predetermined plan or purpose OF injury
or insult; the mob was composed OF ire
sponsibie persons then. the names of none OF
whom ars known 10 the government OF the
United States. nor. as far as the government is
Informed, to its officers agent in New
Orleans"
As promptly as possible after the lamentable
occurrence at New Orleans the president iii.
rected the attorney-generai to GAUGE. through
his department, a full inquiry 10 be made into
all the facts connected there with, ard solicited
his opinion whether any criminal proceedings
would lie under the federal Laws in the federal
courts against persons Charged with the killing
II III hHa. A
the official report. Ii II be found that prose
cutiOn can be maintained undo the statutes Of
the United States the will he presented to
the next grand jury, accord az TO the usual
methods oil criminal administration. But il &c
should be found, as seems probable, that GRIM
inal proceedings can only be taken in tha
coUr.s of Louisiana, the pres dent can in this
direction do no more than To urge upon tho
state officers the duty of promptly bringing the
offenders to trial. This was done in his tele-
gram to the governor OF Louisiana as early as
the 10Th of March. Ii it shall result that the
case can be prosecuted only in the state courts
OF Louisiana and the usual judicial investi ga
ton and procedure under the criminal law is
not resor!ed 10. it will then be the duty of the
United States to consider whether some other
form of redress may be asked.
Ii is understood that the slate grand Jury 10
now investigating the aEair, and while Il is
possible that the Jury may fail to present in
dietmcnts the United States cannot assume
that stch Will be the case.
The United States did not by treaty with
ltaiy become the insurer OF the lives or prop
erty oil the Italian subjects resident within our
territory. No government is able, however
high its civilization, however viglaut its police
supervision, however severe lis criminal code
an however prompt and inhsxible its criminal
administration, TO secure its own citizens
against violence prom pied by individual IN alIce
or n sudden popular tumult. The foreign resi-.
dents must he content ia such cases TO share
the same redress that is offered by the law to
the o items, aud has no jus; cause of comp amt
or right to ask the lDterpositlOn of his country
if the courts are equally open to him for the
redress of his injuries.
The treaty in the first, second, Thru and
notably in the twenty.third articles, clearly
limits the rights guaranteed to the citizens OF
the Contracting powers in the territory of each
to equal usitment aud to free access 10 the
/ courts OF justice.
Foreign residents are not made favored
class. 1t 10 not believed that Italy would de.
sire O more stringent construction OF her duty
under the treaty. Where the injury inf csed
upon foreign resident is not the act of the
government or OF its officers. but OF an indi-
vidual or of a mob. 10 is believed that no
claim for indemnity can justly be made unless
ii shall be made 10 appear that the public au.
thorities charged with the pescs OF the commu-
nifty have connived at the unlawful act, or hay.
ing timely notice of the threatened danger
have been guilty of such gross negligence in
taking the necessary precautions as 10 amount
TO connivance.
Il, therefore, il should appear that among
L Id krr h. 81. OIL A.