New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-06-05
THE GEARY LAW IN PRACTICE .
how THE PRINCIPLE WORKS WHEN APPLIED


TO AMERICANS ABROAD.
Washington, June 4.-The decision OF the Supreme
Court upon the Chinese Exclusion act recently de-
livcred. may possibly have much wider scope and
effect upon a greater variety OF persons than was
probably by the Associate Justices who Joined
with Mr. Cray IN declaring 1t to be the law OF the
land
The volume OF Foreign Relations for 1892, Just
published by the state Department, contains case In
point where the arguments used by "A foreign Govern
ment TO Justify explain IFS decree Of expulsion or
citizen OF the United States It Is pointed out By those
who familiar with the subject, are In suggestive
parallel with those outlined by Justice Gray In an
nouncing the opinion and Judgment Of the supreme
Court OF the United states. The circumstances OF the
case rs shown By the published correspondence were
these:
Leon Splitter. born at Vienna. Austria, In January
1867, enigraed to the United states In February
1882 was naturalized In New York In January 1882
and returned to Europe In November 1889. ana 10
Vienna In July. 1890. In affidavit. Mr.. splitter
declared that his residence was New-lork where he
was manufacturer and that he Intended TO re-
turn TO the United states within two years with the
purpose OF residing and performing the duties OF
citizenship therein
In March, 1902 splitter was Informed by the au-
horliies OF Vienna that he had been expelled from
Austria under law passed in ISL He appealed 10
Minister Grant who brought the case to the attention
OF Count Kalnoky. Prime Minister and Minister Of
Foreign Affairs, protesting that this treatment OF
splitter was In violation Of the treaty Of 1870, be-
tween Austria Hungary and The United states. guarin-
feeling certain rights and protection 10 citizens OF their
respective countries
Replying to Minister Grants complaint on behalf
OF Splitter. Count welserschcmb. for the Minister Of
Foreign Affairs. said that Sptyer's emigration 10 the
United states man!fest!y for the purpose Of
cvadlng the military duty which the Austrian Gov
eminent exacis Of It's citizens: that the expulsion OF
such individuals 1, based upon consdera lions OF public
order: and that every state had q right TO expel
foreig ners from Its territory for as above
stated and that the question whether and when
sons for such expulsion exist can be judged only
by an internal point Of view" This sentiment ac-
cords with the views expressed by Mr. Justice gray,
and the Language Is qnite similar.
Minister Grant notified 10 count Panohy tnat
this Government could not accept that Interpretation
OF the treaty, a position In which he was supported
by Secretary Foster. who In a dispatch dated July
%. 1902 said. nfer stating that the United States
would entertain proposition for modification CT
the treaty In question. but long The treaty
remains In force. the United State, Government will
insist upon "A strict compliance with is tern Is. and
after n careful examination of the In point 1t l.
reluctantly obliged to dissent from the Views eX-
pressed by the Austria hungarian Government AS
splitter was expelled the vague ard ndelnite
grounds OF the interests Of pablo order and
valid and explicit in support Of the order
alleged, your action In making formal protest il
approved by the Department
This faded the CORES pondence 50 far made public
and rs ,pitzrrs departure for the United states
minated In one Of Minister Grants letters II prob
ably closed III. incident. In view. however, Of the
apparent Inconsistency between the views Of the IN
rruilve and judicial branch., OF IN" Government
Of co,rd bv this correspondence. and the decision on
tho next ease Of alleged violation Of treaty rights by
a European Government will be watched with interest.