The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1899-02-09
THDLATTlMER STRIKERS
Have No Claim For Indemnity
Against Our Government.
STATE DEPARTMENTS DECISION.
IF Our Government Yielded to the
Claim Of the Austrian Government
1t Would Be Offering Il Premium to
VoylaSsnoSS

Claim of the Austrian Government
1t Would Be Offering Premium to
Lawlessness.
Washington, Feb. 9.--The state de-
partmert, after mature consideration,
has declined to recognize the claim of
the Austro-Hungarian government for
indemnity on account of the Hungarian
strikers killed by Sheriff Martins posse
at Hazleton, Pa, Sept. 10, 1897. The
claim has been pending for many
months upon the basis of report filed
with the state department by Robert
d. Coke. the representative of the
Austro-Hungarian government. The
department action is based upon a
special opinion prepared by Solicitor N.
L. Penfeld, covering the entire field
Of national responsibility in such cases
Of mob violence and rioting. which
probably will form the basis of future
decisions In that line. In his opinion
Solicitor Pentield goes over so much
of the evidence produced upon the trial
of Sheriff Martin as seemed necessary
to establish the facts briefly, and then
concludes with the following statement
of the principles by which the depart
ment of state is bound:
mo government insures the abso-
lutte security Of all foreigners who may
happen to be within its territory.
Aliens. as well as nationals. are bound
to respect the laws, the institutions
and the constituted authorities of the
state in whose territory they reside.
They are treated the same as nationals,
and, like the latter, they are, in case
of infraction of the penal law. prose-
cuted and punished. In particular, If
they take part in any insurrection or in
a civil war the treatment to which
they expose themselves in such l-.w-
less actions affords no legitimate
ground for diplomatic Intervention.
"The responsibility of governments
toward foreigners is not more extern
sive than that of the sovereign toward
his own subjects. The duties of hospi-
tality do not prevent the entire eXer-
else of the right which belongs to SOW
ereignty to employ the legal means
to provide for the preservation Of the
state, nor are foreigners entitled to a
privileged position. nor are they ex-
empt from the consequences of cTim-
nal conduct, threatened or commit
ted; nor are they to be ndemnified for
damages resulting from such conduct
and from the imperious necessity of
watching over the safety of the public
veal.
This government recognizes the in
ternational obligation to do justice,
but it cannot admit that in this case
legal injustice has been done. Even il
it were to be conceded that the sheriff
and his deputies were acting wrong
fully and unlawfully. still the remedy
by way of diplomatic Intervention can
not be invoked until all remedies have
been exhausted before the ordinary ju-
dicia1 tribunals. In this case abundant
remedies are afforded for redress if
any actionable wrong has been COM
mitted.
This government cannot tolerate a
state Of anarchy. either threatened or
inaugurated in communities composed
either of it's own citizens or of aliens
who may engage in Industrial or other
pursuits within its territory. If they
obey the precepts of the law it will pro-
tect them; If they defy the law and the
constituted authorities then, in COM
mon with all others who participate
with them in such acts of lawlessness
and violence, they must be deemed to
accept the consequences of the coptict
which they invite.
1T is not shown that the trial of the
sheriff and his deputies was not fair
10 ctnt hot Iar
was done by the sheriff and his depu-
ties, because there was abundant evil
t"rce given at the trial and justifyng
i.'r verdict rendered. that the Austro-
| hungarian subjects who were slain or
wounded were aggressors and vioators
of the law in refusing to obey the COM
mand of the sheriff to disperse.
THE Lattimer strikers were disturb
ers Of the public peace and violators of
the law. They were rapidly drifting
into state of petty war. 1t was the
duty of the sheriff to take measures to
prevent as well as to repress civil
tumults and disorders. On previous oc.
casions he had commanded them to
dispense and they obeyed. They were
perfectly familiar with his official po-
sitiOn and the nature of the authority
he exercised. If they had obeyed his
lawful command no blood would have
been shed. and in their lawless and ag-
gressve conduct, challenging the en-
bodied force of the state, they placed
themselves beyond the protection OF
the law. To reward the wounded living
and the heirs of those slain under such
would be Offering pre-
MUM to laWlessness and inviting re-
lewed outbreaks and riots"