The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1892-01-05
THE POLICY OF THE GOVERNMENT
AS TO RIGHT OF ASYLUM.

AS TO RIGHT OF ASYLUM.
The question of Diplomatic Asylum"
is not, perhaps, so clearly understood by
the American people as it should be
certainly it is misunderstood if we are
to take the telegraphic and press express
sion Of the last few days, concerning the
refugees in the American Legation build
at Santiago, as an index to popular be-
lief
diplomatic asylum, or refuge, given in
the house of Government Minister at a
foreign court, to political refugees, is to
be kept distinct in the mind as widely
different from the shelter a country gives
to refugee who escapes to its shores and
there claims the right of asylum.
The general rule OF international law
is, that neutral is obliged to grant asy-
lum to individuals Of the enemy who
come into its territorial limits. to
escape pursuit, or to find protection, from
acts of hostility If Chilean political
refugee escapes to the United States, I'M
der no circumstance would this Govern
ment surrender him to his pursuers, save
upon the basis of treaty obligations spe-
eially directed to refugees as their objects
But it will be well for American citi-
zens to remember that the policy of our
Government has been. from the begin
ming, to discourage diplomatic asylum,
and that the United States look, with
great disfavor upon it, and has prohib-
tied its Ministers extending it, except the
local custom, the law OF the locality. rec
ognlzes and demands it, and even then
they must limit it so far as is possible.
In other words, our Government has not
believed diplomatic asylum, as rule, to
be wise, conducive of peace, or that it
strengthens the bonds of unity.
Let us see if this statement is correct.
Secretary of State Calhoun, said to Min.
: lister Wise in 1874, that in revolutionary
countries and revolutionary times. the
right of diplomatic asylum should be lib
orally construed. He did not say that
claim tor it should be made by our Min
listers. Secretary of State Clayton, in
l849, said, to Minister McCauley, that
though the privilege is accorded in Mo-
hammedan and South American States. it
should be carefully guarded That those,
not our citizens, have no righful claim
to our protection, especially when it is
likely to bring our Consuls or Ministers
into conflict with the rights of friendly
Powers.
Mr.. Webster, when Secretary of State
in 1851, said to Minister Peyton, that only
the acquiescence of Chile, on former oc-
casions, to the exercise of the hospitality,
precluded the United States from object
ing to the continued granting of such
protection to the same extent. But if
that Government, Chile, made objection
to any particular refugee being sheltered
in the house of the United States Minis
ter, the latter would be advised to tell the
refugee that he could be no longer pro-
tected.
Secretary of State Marcy, in 1854, to
Mr.. Clay said:
Neither the law of nations. nor the stipula
tions of our treaty with Peru. recognizes the
right of our Consuls to afford protection 10
those who have rendered themselves obnox-
Ious 70 the authority OF the Government under
which they dwell.
Peru, by her soldiery, went into the
American Consulate and arrested refu-
gees, and the United States refused to
condemn the act, or consider the flag
insulted.
Mr.. Marcy in the same year warned
our representative in Turkey that shelter
should be granted only because Turkey
recognized the custom, and even then to
act with great discretion. Mr.. Seward
wrote to like effect to Mr.. Hale in 1866;
Mr.. Fish to Mr.. Beardsley in 1873, and to
Mr.. Jones in 1876, and Mr. Evarts held
the same in instructions to Mr.. Mathews
in 1880.
Mr.. Marcy instructed our Consuls in
Nicaragua in 1855 that they had no right
to grant asylum to persons charged with
otfenses by the local Government. In
1859, in Valparaiso, the United States
OonsuI gave shelter TO particular refu-
gees. The Chilean soldiery attacked the
house, rescued the refugees, and Mr..
Trevitt, the Consul, was given his pass
ports. Minister Biglsr, in reporting the
facts, stated that the English Consul at
another Chilean port had given such asy-
lum, and Chile had manifested no dissat-
isfaction thereat. and that the practice of
diplomatic asylum was generally per-
mitted in the Pacific Republics, and in
none more frequently than in Chile.
Mr.. Cass, Secretary of State, then directed
Mr.. Bigler to state that our Government
might demand the restoration of our Con-