New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-05-25
VIOLATIONS OF TREATY RIGHTS.

FURTHFR DISCUSSION IN THE SENATE ON THE
BILL TO PROVIDE FOR THEIR PUNISHMENT.
Washington May Q4.-The bill to provide for the
punishment OF violations Of treaty rights Of aliens
taken up again in the Senate 10 day-Mr. Morgan
continuing his argument In advocacy OF the bill. Re
fernDg to the Of the kalians killed IN New
Orleans, Mr.. Morgan said that # American citizens
had been matreated In Italy and II the italian Gov
ernm@,t had given to the Government Of the United
States such IN answer as the American Government
had given to Italy, the comment would be: Your
Government Is very imperfect ono; and you ought TO
have Informed OF 1t when the treaty pending"
Mr. Blaine. he said, had been compelled acting exactly
right 10 the secret service fund to pay s25 900
to the families Of the maeacred in tire prison OF
New Orleans. The Government Of the United States
In q rather piuable condition when the Secretary
OF State, without express sanction Of law was com
PEELED to resort 10 the secret service fund 10 keep
peace with foreign Government He went on to
argue thet 1t would be impossible TO frame and pass
through Congress Federal code that would all
cases Of Violations of tho rights Of aliens and that
the only way TO do las provided in tho pending
b to adopt the laws Of the several States and let
those laws operate on the Federal courts.
Mr. Gray asked Mr.. Morgan whether, II the New
Orleans outrage had happened in England, Lord Sails
bury would not have been compelled TO tell the
italian Government that 1t would have to walt until
the ordinary judicial tribunals had taken action and
would have to abide by that action.
Mr.. Morgan replied that his opinion that Lord
Salisbury and every other English statesman In such
case would reply 10 Italy that the English Govern
ment had put in operation the necessary methods Of
procedure to have fair judicial Investigation. lie
would not turn the matter TO the town council
OF Glasgow or Liverpool The English Government
would always answer: ave are able 10 stand ND to
our treaties and to meet our engagements and to do
what we have agreed to DO, because our system OF
laws enables to lay this question before the ju
dicial tribunals OF the country
Mr. Gray-Do YOU suppose that the Foreign Affairs
Department Of Great Britain has any control over
the action Of the courts; or that such control would
be tolerated for one moment
Mr. Morgun-No: and nothing OF that sort ia In this
bin We do not propose to coptrol the action OF the
courts We propose TO provide courts to take action
As 1t is. We have got courts that take action
In behalf OF the United States The bill misunder-
stood If Senators have the conception Of it that 1t IS
control over the courts. All that can do is TO
provide proper jurisd' elton for the courts.
At the close Of his argument Mr.. Morgan moved,
with the assent Of the Committee on Foreign Rela-
tons. that the bill should till next December.
Mr.. Vest favored the posponement Of the bin, but
remarked that under the Constitution unnaturazed
citizen had the rights and the protection
as citizens Of the United States. The Constitution
provided that no State shall deny TO any person mot
to CITIZEN the equal protection Of the laws And
II louisiana should undertake TO pass act dscrimi
mating against unnaturalized foreigner the Supreme
Court Of the United States would Immediately declare
II to be unconstitutional. He was therefore opposed
to the bin working determination in favor OF the
foreigner and against the native citizen.
Mr.. Turpe favored the recommital Of the BILL It's
reference to tbs Judiciary Committee The bill went
even beyond the recommendation of the President,
although that recommendation most radical and
revolutionary He did think that the Judiciary Of
the Federal Government should take jurisdiction any
crime committed against the laws Of state. All
criminal trials should be had under the lex loci and
In the place where the crime committed.
After further discussion, Mr. Harris. who made the
motion yesterday to refer the bill TO the Judiciary
Committee. withdrew that notion and disclaimed
having the remotest intention OF disrespect to the
Foreign Relations Committee.
MIR. Teller then renewed the motion 10 reconm the
bill 10 the Committee on Foreign Relations, and the
matter went over without action.