The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-03-09
COMMISSIONER CHAMBERS
 STANDS FOR MAINE MARTYRS

lNA Wxk1N \ x NOs X eSsSsSeSsSsseeeeseS.eeSsesss<ssse%*- !, killed. and to the men who survived in. juries while wearing the uniform of the United States" and insists that 1t 'shau be proportionate to the gravity of the afs fair" But 1t Is when Presid snt Harri- son takes personal control of .he problem
 that a true comprehension of the nature
 of the claims Is gathered. In his special message of January 25. 1892. to Congress (see Richardson's Messages and Papers of the President. Vol. 9, pp. H5-226) he treats the subject exhaustiveiy. and for.
 wards to Congress all the correspondence
 This message is perhaps the most per feet statement in our diplomatic history of the international questions involved in claim by one government against an- other growing out of injuries done to the sailors or soldiers of one nation while on a friendly visit to another. and es- tablishes with a clearness never before so ably elucidated the dual character of what has been erroneously treated as purely national, to the exclusion of any individual participation in its results. All through the discussion, bringing to bear upon it's many phases the great , store of legal wisdom which made him conspicuous among many Presidents noted for legal ability, he keeps plainly | In view the purely national demand for | insult to the uniform and the demand for
  One in tte right hand, the other in the left, but uniting in the body of the na | tion. An apology to the nation, 1ndem
 nifty to the individual. The purely na. | tional phase of the claim would have left
 the sailors unprotected and deprived them | of all individual e mpensation. The col l lection and payment of the indemnity | to the injured sailors or their personal | representatives. exactly as the Govern
 ment had so often done in other In.
 stances for private cit:zens. is natural
 sequence of President Harrisons reason. | ing. He never sanctioned the doctrine
 that the individual sufferers, though sail
 ors. should lose their just claims to in, | demnity because the claim in its largest l sense involved national clements. As a
 matter of fact as we'll as of law the i Chile to our Government for distribution among the families of the two men killed and those who received personal | injuries in the attack of the l6th of Oc- | lations. 1892. D. 6.) When the money reached Washington | 1t was not even deposited in the Treas | urv but was by the Secretary of the Navy distributed to the rightful owners, sailors who had been injured, and to | the survivors of those killed. In the message of President Harrison there are many expressions which shed | light upon this question, but will quote | only one or two. He says.
 l If the dignity as well as the prestige | and the influence of the United States | are not to be wholly sacrificed we must protect those who in foreign ports dis- play the flag or wear the colors of this | Government against insult. brutality. and | death inflicted in resentment of the acts | of their Government and not for any
 fault of their own.
 Again, when referring to his interest in
 the peace and development of South
 American Republics. he says:
 1t must. however. be understood that I n mi mi vyh Ia l utmost forbearance toward weaker. pow I CTS. will extend it's strong and adequate
 protection to Its citizens. to it's officers.
 and to its humblest sailor when made
 In resentment not of their personal mis-
 conduct. but of the official acts of their Government. A
 It Is a singular coincidence but of far
 reaching significance, that the President | In closing his message should have al-
 luded in the succeeding paragraph to the one last quoted, to the claim of an un- naturalized foreigner an Irishman,- and
 probably a British subject. who had suf- | fered severe personal injuries in Valpar-
 also at the same time the sailors of the | Baltimore were assaulted. This man was | fireman on the American steamer ke- | weenaw. which was undergoing repairs l in the harbor at Valparaiso at that time. l The President reports to Congress that i he "Girected the Attorney-Ceneral to
 cause the evidence of the officers and
 crew of that vessel to be taken upon Its | arrival !n San Francisco, and that testf-
 mony Is also herewith transmitted" And | finally the President concludes his mes l sege with the statement that
 | claim for reparat'on has been made in | behalf of this man. for while he wes not
 citizen of the United States, the doc | Urine long held by us as expressed in the Consular Regulations is: The princi- ples which are maintained by this Gov | ernment in regard to the protection, as
 distinguished from the relief, of seamen | are we'll settled. It Is held that the cir l cumstance that the vessel Is American Is evidence that the seamen on board are such, and in every regularly documented l merchant vessel the crew win find their
 protection in the nag that covers them '. | It would seem that the President had
 chosen the opportunity afforded by his | message, emphasizing the demand for an | apology from Chile for the insult done
 to the ''colors' of the Government and | for indemnity to the killed and injured | sailors. to present the claims of sailor l of a merchant vessel who had been sim | ilarly assaulted for the purpose of Illus
 trating the doctrine that the unprovoked
 assaults upon the person of anyone en.
 titled to the protection of our flag will l receive exactly the same treatment. and l taat there is no difference In the charac-
 ter of the demand which will he made | on behalf of this Government against the offending government. whether the claim l ant be soldiers, sailors, diplomatic rep
 resentatives, or private individuals
 I All nave been treateu eSdCtlN ditke l Throughout the existence of the nation this has been the unvarying policy. Since l the suggestion was first made that a cit- | izen who dares to wear the blue" has
 less rights to indemnity for wrongs suf-
 fered at the hands of foreign govern l ment in time of peace than any other | citizen would have for injuries inflicted | under exactly similar conditions. I have | "searched the records and 1t affords
 me pleasure in this high relation to make | record that I have found no authority | to support the proposition.
 | It is said that the citizen when he en-
 lists in the military service of his Gov. | ernment surrenders the rights of pr-
 vate individual in exchange for a higher | protection. But this proposition will not 1 bear analysis. and it is not true. The
 soldier or sailor Is rendered much more helpless to defend himself in time of | peace than the private individual. The
 soldier can not use his gun, even in | personal defense, except upon the com
 mand to fire by an officer authorized to | give the order. A soldier may be shot | down in the streets, helpless to defend | his person. because the Government has
 sent him out without the means of de- l fense.
 l In fact, a soldier in time of peace, while | in the line of duty, is the most helpless | of men when it comes to resisting dead | ly attack, and If his life be lost in a | street broil for which he Is blameless,