The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1919-11-21
THE JENKINS CASE.

Recent developments in the abduc-
ton of William 0. Jenkins, American
consul at Puebla, Mexico, tend to con-
firm the good judgment Of the United
States government in Withholding pay
ment of the Sl50,000 ransom to the
parties who turned over the money to
the bandits. The mere fact that Jen-
kins has been arrested on the charge of
making false statements is enough to
confirm the wisdom of the decision. -
Barre Times.
There is no justification for such
comment either in logic or fact. If this
be logical reasoning, then all the Mex
lean government has to do to square
itself with the American state depart
ment is to put an outraged American
under arrest on suspicion, This would
be hard in a case of known murder, for
ii would be almost impossible TO con-
vince even Democratic statesman that
a murdered man was a complete to
his own death, The Times talks as if
it believes an accusation from such an
INSCRIPTIONS government as the Mex
lean is tantamount to conviction, and
it would read an American out of court
on these fimsy grounds. But the facts
as well as the logic are against the con-
temporary The state department is
convinced that Jenkins did not help to
kidnap himself But, nevertheless, it
washes its hands Of the case. And The
Times upholds the administration in
such uniustifable treatment of an
American citizen.-St Adams Messen-
ger
In its comment on the quotation
above presented, the contemporary goes
on the assumption that the entire Jen-
kins matter has been solved to the last
detail and it assumed, too, that the ar
rest Of Jenkins by Mexican authorities
is not justified because the arrest was
made by the Mexican government and,
therefore, must be discountenanced
The mystery about the reported alb
duction of Jenkins has not been solved
to the satisfaction of everybody, even
though the contemporary may consider
it so. The mystery may never be thor
oughly solved because of the many in
tricacies involved. But until more light
has been thrown on the case, we CON
slider it measure of self-defense on the
part Of the United States government
to withhold payment of the ransom
until the United States knows exactly
where the $l50,000 is to 90, as well as
the details in the case, We did not say
that the United States government
should refuse to pay the money if the
claim is proven; we stated that the
United States government had shown
good Judgment in withholding payment,
and, in our Interpretation, Withholding
payment means keeping back, not nee
essarily as finality but at least for
the time being. We consider it good
judgment on the part of the United
States to have the claim proven beyond
doubt in order to prevent the perpe.
tration OF countless frauds on the gov
eminent from this time forth.
AS to the reliability Of the Mexican
governments intentions, we have no il
lusions, any more than the st. Adams
contemporary has; but we do not think
that anything and everything coming
out Of Mexico (eyen misdemeanor
charge should be counted out immedi-
ately just because it comes from a Mex
lean source. Such charge ought to be
scrutinized closely when it directly af-
fects the United States government
and an American citizen; and, as we
stated in the first place, we believe in
Withholding the payment Of $4,000
ransom fund for the release Of an
American, alleged to have been abduct-
ed, until the case has been sifted to the
bottom.