Richmond planet. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1883-1938, 1900-09-15

New Orleans riot of 1891, said: 'sThe
United States did not by treaty with
Italy,, become the insurer of the lives
and property of Italian subjects resid-
ing within our territory. For
eign residents are not favored class"
That is the doctrine of American
diplomacy, and it reads well from our
standpoint But when we are burning
with indignation because of the out
RACES inflicted upon our own people in
China it does not sound so well. The
letter OF Secretary Evarts to the Chi
nese minister, in 1880, applies directly
to the present situation, and clearly
demonstrates the difference between
the selfishness OF diplomacy and the
justice of international procedure.
Selhshness and self-seeking in nations
ultimately prove to be as unfortunate
and unwise as selfshness and self-seek-
ing in individuals. tits particularly un-
fortunate that so-called Christian ma
tions, living under the higher law, the
law of love, should so place themselves.
Public men in the legislative and
executive branches of our government
regard it as a matter of deep regret
that the federal government has no
power to punish violators of interna-
tional law and of treaty stipulations.
State law, in all such cases, is in the
way of federal law and procedure.
Here are few examples of riots in our
own country, in which the federal gov
eminent was unable to punish the
criminals:
The riot in New Orleans in 1851. occa-
stoned by the arrest and execution of some
American hlibusters in Cuba, when cit
liens of New Orleans Inflicted injury upon
the persons and property of Spanish sub
jects.
The riot in Denver, 1880, when two China
men were beaten to death and a number
seriously maltreated.
The riot at Rock Springs, Wye, Septem-
Der, 1855, when 76i Cinnamon were killed and
wounded.
The riot at New Orleans, in 1891, when II
prisoners were taken from Jail and put
TO death by mob.
There are other incidents, but these
will suffice. In each instance it was
found impossible, on account of local
sentiment, to successfully prosecute
the perpetrators of these outrages in
the local courts, and, in most instances,
it was impossible even to institute a
prosecution. In each case the foreign
country interested insisted and de-
manded that the United States govern
ment should assert its authority an6
bring the offenders to justice, and
seemed incapable of understanding
why the United States government
should be powerless to act in the prem
Uses.
Snao l-ir &c I, = = -
ate, and urging that congress should
enact legislation to enable the federal
government to act in such cases, Sena-
tor Davis of Minnesota, one of our
greatest constitutional and interna-
tional lawyers, said: ''rhis government
has been adopting Legislation and
state procedure from the beginning.
The rules of practice and proceeding
are settled by state laws by As differ
ent codes, by 45 different rules of right
and property in as many different
states"
This is an epitomized statement of
the condition of the United States. in
constitutional and international law
in the emergency which confronts us
when we consider the ACCESSIBILITY or
necessity of demanding indemnity or
retribution for the outrages which
have been committed in China.
Manifestly our condition, position
and precedents are not favorable.
and it is not to be wondered that
our state department officials are will
ing to privately admit that we cannot
expect any consideration from China.
other or better than we have axtepdad
to that country and to other countries
under similar conditions.
When the millennium comes, if not
sooner, statesmen will see that it is as
wise to serve the nations as 1t is wise
to serve individuals under the moral
law, which is higher and better than
national or interna tional law, or
diplomacy. SMITH ID. FRY
Makes some Difference