The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-04-22
A CASE OF JUSTICE DENIED.

the Chilean government has finally re-
fused to pay the claims of Patrick
Shields and Andrew McKinstry for In
juries received from assaults of a
Chilean mob at Valparaiso in 1891. The
case presents some interesting phases.
Shields Is an Irishman by birth and Nc
Kinstry a Scotchman. In 1891, although
not yet naturalized American citizens,
they were working on the American
merchant steamer Keweenaw. Shields as
a fireman n McKinstry as a sailor.
The Keweenaw was in the harbor Of
Valparaiso at the same time with the
United States steamer Baltimore, and
these two men were with a party Of
sailors from the latter vessel when they
were attacked by an armed. mob Of
Chileans and police in the streets Of Val
paradise in October. 1891, resulting In the
killing of one or two and the w~ounding
of several. Shields and McKinstry were
among the injured. As soon as the facts
were brought to the knowledge of the
Washington government President Har-
rison made a demand on the Chilean
~ " II 0ROACSy Z,
and prepared to enforce 1t. After some
higgling Chile finally paid an indemnity
Of $4,000 to the families of the sailors of
the Baltimore who were killed and to
those who were injured. This ended the
incident SO far as the American sailors
were concerned. but 1t did not include
Shields and McKinstry. In q special
message to Congress on the subject in
January, 1892, President Harrison SAID:
Upon Information received that Patrick
Shields, an lrishman. and probably a British
subject, but at the time a fireman OF the
American steamer Keweenaw, I'm the harbor
of Valparaiso for repairs. has been subject
ed to personal injuries in that city-largely
by the police-I directed the Attorney-gen-
eral to cause the evidence of the officers
and crew OF that vessel to be taken upon
It's arrival In san Francisco, and that EVIL
and even savagery. of the treatment OF this
poor man by the Chilean police would be
incredible II the evidence of Shields was not
supported by other direct testimony and by
the distressing condition of the man himself
when he was finally able to reach his vessel.
hack cap wreck OF b tne ve fro,n says his nec he &c came me
hips from beatings. weak and stupid. and
Is still In a kind Of paralyzed condition. and
has never been able to do duty since A
claim for reparation has been made for this
man. for, while he was not a citizen OF the
United States, the doctrine long held by US
Is that the circumstance that the vessel
Is American IL evidence that the seamen on
board are such.
This shows that although Shields was
a British subject. President Harrison de-
manded reparation for his injuries on
the ground that as a fireman board an
American vessel he was entitled to the
same protection as an American citizen.
This was the last heard of the claim dur
ing the Harrison administration. The
Chilean government. scheming for de-
lay. succeeded in p%ostponing further con-
sideration of the case until after Mr..
the Cleveland administration abandoned
it on the ground that the claimants. be-
ing British subjects, must look to hat
government for protection. for the next
heard Of the case a San Francisco at
torney had brought it to the attention
Of the British Parliament. From there
it was referred to a special commission
composed Of one representative from
Great Britain. one from Chile and a
third from Germany. The San Fran
cisco attorney who had charge of the
matter has just been notified by the com
mission that the Chilean government has
refused to pay the claim. Thus Shields
and McKinstry have fallen between two
stools. IL they had been American citi-
zens their indemnity would have been
included in the amount demanded for
the other American sailors, and finally
paid by the Chilean government. Or II
| President Harrison had been reelected
h would doubtless have continued to
| assert their claim on the ground that as
employees on an American vessel they
were entitled 10 American protection,
and Chile would have been forced to pay
| the claim. But a change of administra.
ton and the adoption of a new foreign
| policy compelled the claimants TO look tC
| Great Britain for the enforcement OF
their rights. AS a rule the British gov
m extends protection to it's citi.
zens everywhere. but in this case the
fact that the men were serving on ar
American ship and had already claimed
the protection of the American faf
probably p~rejudiced their case n af
forded a pretext for not pressing theil
claim. Besides. II has been the British
policy In recent years to foment troubl'
! between the United States and Chill