Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1893-06-05
DOES NOT CONNECT.
Our Chinese Policy and Another
Notable Case.
AUSTRIA EXCLUDES AN AMERICAN,

And the Matter Puts the State Depart
ment in Apparent Opposition to the
Recent Supreme Court Decision on the
Geary Law-An Interesting Incident sor
Those Who Like Questions Diplomatic
and International.
WASHINGTON, June 5.-The decision Of
the supreme court upon the Chinese ex-
clusion act recently delivered may possibly
have a much wider scope and affect a
greater variety of persons than was prob
ably foreseen by the associate justices who
Joined with Mr.. Gray in declaring it to be
the law of the land. The volume of for
eign relations" for 1s92-just published by
the state OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES n case in
point, wherein the arguments used by a
foreign government to justify or explain
its decree of expulsion of citizens of the
United States, it is pointed out by those
who are familiar with the subject, are in
suggestive parallel with those outlined by
Justice Gray in announcing the opinion
and Judgment of the supreme court of the
United States on the 18th of last month
Splitter Was Persona Non Grata
From the correspondence it is gathered
that Keen Splitter. born in Austria, emf
grated to New York in 1882 and was natur-
allied. He emigrated, as charged by the
Austrian foreign office. to evade military
duty in Austria In 1890 he went back to
Vienna to stay two years, according to his
affidavit, when he intended to return to
the United States and remain here as a
citizen In March, 1892, he was notified
that he had been expelled from Austria
under the statutes of that country. He
appealed to Minister Grant, who protested
that the expulsion was contrary to treaty
provisions
Kalnoky Argues Like Gray.
Replying to Minister'S Grants complaint
on behalf of Splitter, Connt Welserscheimb,
for the minister of foreign affairs, said that
Spitzer's emigration to the United States
was manifestly for the purpose of avoiding
military duty; that the expulsion of such
individuals is based upon considerations of
public order; that every state has right
t. expel foreigners from its territory for
reasons as above stated. and the question
whether and when the reasons for such eX-
pulsions exist can be judged only from
national point of view" This statement
accords with the views expressed by JUS
tice Gray, and the language is quite SIM
liar.
, Foster Disagrees with Kalnoky.
Minister Grant notified kalnoky that
this government could not accept that in-
depreciation of the treaty, position in
which he was supported by Secretary Fos-
ter. who in dispatch dated July %, 1892,
said after stating that the United States
would entertain a proposition for the mod
ification of the treaty in question: But
solong as the treaty remains in force the
United States will insist upon strict
compliance with its terms" Foster added
that Splitter was expelled for "vague and in
definite reasons"
Waiting Now for the Next Case.
This ended the correspondence so far as
made public, and as Spitzer's departure
for the United States was intimated IN one
of Minister Grants letters, it probably
closed the incident. In view, however, Of
the apparent inconsistency between the
views of the executive and judicial branches
of the government disclosed by this
correspondence and The decision on the
Geary law, the attitude of the government
upon the next case of alleged Vi olation of
treaty rights by a European government
will be watched with interest.