Asheville daily citizen. [volume] (Asheville, N.C.) 1890-1900, 1892-01-28

HcdTu III luclT OWu luSlluCdllOH give III
contestable authority to the trial held at
Valparaiso.
In the course our conferences, we some.
times considered the case in which the
government of the United States and
that of Chill should fail to agree when
the investigation should be terminated
and the two governments should have
formed their opinion and we agreed that
arbitration was the best means of set
tling the difficulty, and advancing further
in this conciliatory spirit, we even form
ally agreed that the differences that
might arise should be submitted to arbi-
tration.
This agreement to accept arbitration
has been the basis of several of our con-
ferences, especially that OF the 18th inst,
and no antecedent fact interfering there
with, has come to my knowledge. On
the contrary, took occasion to inform
you, on the first of January, that my
government authorized me to conclude
an agreement, looking to arbitration
and my government subsequently ap-
proved the agreement concluded hy me
with you, of which also informed You.
As the criminal trial initiated at Val
paraiso has not yet come to an end, my
government has not yet been able to re-
ply to the demands made by that of the
United States.
The various documents and antece-
dents to which have called your atten-
tion in my foregoing communications
were designed to inform the United
States government of the progress of the
judicial investigation, and OF the facts
therebo elected. They do not, however,
constitute reply, which can only be
given when the facts are definitely
brought to light by the sentence which
must be pronounced by the courts.
The testimony which the government
of the United States has caused to be
taken in California from the crew of the
Baltimore cannot be taken as the evi.
dence of the trial which is being held at
Valparaiso where offenses were COM
mitted. This testimony may be useful
for disciplinary or administrative pur.
poses in the United States, but it cannot
serve as basis of judicial sentence either
in Chill or in the United States.
The copy have today had the honor
to send you OF the statement made by
one OF the seamen of the Baltimore at
Valparaiso, shows that the seamen
made no charge against the police. The
charges which he makes here, in the alb.
sence of the accused parties in contradic'
tion OF his first statement can have no
value, either in law or in your enlight.
ened opinion.
1t is to be observed, moreover, that
the statement made by this seamen at
Valparaiso is attested by the judge. bv
the signature OF the seamen himself, and
by that of the interpreter who was an
officer OF the Baltimore who had been
appointed for the express purpose of in
spring the deponent with confidence.
You were pleased to state in your in
st uctions to MIR. Egan, that the under
signed has not communicated to the
United States government the note that
was addressed to him by Mr.. Malta on
the 11th of December last. The first time
that the honorable secretary of state saw
fit to call my attention to the aforesaid
note of Mr.. Malta, told him that that
note contained instructions addressed
to me by Mr.. Malta and that as had
not been directed to communicate it
officially to the department of state,
there was no reason why the honorable
secretary should take cognizance of it.
further reminded you that it was a
doctrine established by the American
government that documents exchanged
between the president and congress or
between the department OF state and the
diplomatic representative OF the United
States in foreign countries could not
form subject of discussion for foreign
governments. also took the liberty to
remind you of the case of the illustrious
Webster and the representative of Aus
tria in 1850. The Austrian government
complained at that time because it con-
sidered the instructions sent to the rep
resentative of the United States unjust
or disrespectiul to Austria, said instruc-
tions having been published in a mes
sage of the president who sent it to the
senate.
This department" said Mr.. Webster,
has on nformcr occasions, informed min
lsters of foreign powers that communi-
cation from the president to either house
of congress is regarded as domestic
communication; OF which, ordinarily, no
foreign state has no cognizance, and in
more recent cases the improperly of
making such communications subject
of correspondence and diplomatic dis
cussion has been fully shown"
The circumstance of publicity does not
change the character of communication
in the opinioa of MIR. Webster, because
such is the common and usual mode OF
proceeding" in communications of the
president and senate. 1t was, therefore,
on account of the nature of the note and
on no other reason that based my alb
stention from communicating to you the
instructions which Mr.. Malta has sent
me on the 1lth of December, and l had
the honor so to inform you.
added, however, that it was far from
being the purpose of my government to
act in manner at all offensive to the
president of the United States or to any
member of his cabinet, and that Mr..
Matta's note, il rightly interpreted, ad-
mitted of no such construction.
afterwards had the honor to inform
YOU that had received instructions from
my government to inform that of the
United States that its minister at Santi
ago was not persona grota to the govern
ment of Chill, which would be very glad tC
receive another representative from the
United States, you were pleased to ac
acknowledge that the government o.
Chill had the right to ask that change
should be made. Afterwards having giver
you notice, addressed to you id writ
ing. the same communication which
had made to you verbally.
have deemed it my duty to state il
this note the foregoing facts which
show the friendly and cordial purpose
of our conferences, in which you tool
the most important part.
Pedro Montt.
Blaine to MONT.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE.
Washington, ID. c., Jan. 27, 1892.
SIR have the honor to &C cknowledg
your favor dated 23d inst, but not re