New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-01-24
4 CONSELiR ADJ Sc.


A Petition to Congress to Punish American
"Consuls for Robbng American Citizens Dying
in Foreign Countries is portentous title. Al
first blush might be pardCned for declining
to take it seriously. 1t has the flavor of a Gil
bert and Sullivan comic opera The Govern
ment is supposed TO punish all evildoers as a
matter of course. That Is one Of It's prime
functions. Especially is it supposed to look out
for its own employees and to require of them
faithful service often under sureties. and TO
punish vigorously any Of them guilty of mai
feasance. As for the consuls ii is their par
tcular duty TO safeguard the interests of Amer
can citizens abroad. And so this petition seems
| much like one 10 punish postmastcrs for rob
bling the mails. or to punish policemen for
burglary and highway robbery. Yet the docl-
mcnt is seriously meant, and according TO The
facts sci forth Ivy the petitioner there is urgent
need of such action a. that asked therein.
Briefly stated. this is the case. as ser forth ny
the petitioner the cXacl ruth Of the statement
apparently no; being called into question: we'll
known American citizen died in Paris in OclO-
her. 1880. He had Al that time about his person
sum Of money amounting - several thousand
dollars This the Paris police Scrupulou>ly
handed over 10 the American Nice-Consul in his
official capacity. the COnSultienclal being 9b-
sent. and received receipt for II. Not know
ing how much money the deceased had left
available for the purpose hS father on hear
ing of his death. Immediately transmitted $1,000
to the NiccConSui by cable. for funeral ex-
penseS. No accounting has since been made by
the Nice-COnS to the father Of the deceased
Of either the money left by The deceased or of
the unexpended balance % the sum cabled No
wonder thai the fathcr says bluntly. "Thc
money was embczzcd by Ine Vice-Con>ul" and
asks the Government whether it ought not tn
take cOcnzance Of the case and bring It's I'M
faithful servant to book. But what IS the Gov
ernmcnts reply II advises him 10 see prl-
vate lawyer about il. with view 20 starting
A civil suit for recovery of the money. since
under the law there is m penal liability which
can be enforced against the alleged cmbezzer'
There is no dSpulng the mans guilt. Bat the
law does not provide penalty for that par
tcular crime in that particular public officer.
Certainly that is an extraordinary state of
affairs An officer Of the Federal Government
can maladminister his office to the wronging
and robbery Of IN American citizen and 20
scot free There is no law under which he can
he punished. If he were bank clerk. or Il
commercial traveller or anybody else in bust
ness or private life. he could be snapped up
with warrant promptly enough But being
Government employe. specially charged with
the performance Of the duties he has fla
GRAVITY violated. he is exempt. He can return
10 this country at the end of his term of ser
vice and live on his ill-gotten gains, and the
only comfort the Government can give his vic
tins is the advice 10 see lawyer about IT,
Tho present Administration is blamcess in the
matter II is not responsible for the defaultnc
official. who was agent of the former Adj
ministraion. and it finds itself debarred by law
from taking any action in the case. The fault
is with the law. and il Is fault that Congress
should lose no time in remedyng There can
be nothing more deporable. and nothing more
ominouS for the future Of the Republic thar
for the people to he made to feel that the Gov
eminent either can not or will not give them
redress against the expressions Of its own I'm.
faithful servants