Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1919-11-28
CAPITAL IS SILENT
REGARDING NOTE
IN JENKINS CASE
: 2 o. department Officials De-
: ~ rs. Discuss Carranza'S
Nus seo ng to Release
u. S. {, ,uIar Agent.

Fepheu Win an arSumentdtiNe dlplO-
matte refusal to the American govern
ments demand for the immediate re-
lease of William o, Jenkins, the con-
sular agent Imprisoned at Puebla.
The official note was delivered to-
day but not made public. There is
no reason to doubt that il agrees with
the copy given out last night by the
Mexican consul general at El PaSo.
No. comment was forthcoming to in
dicate how the state department re-
CARDS the answer to what was consid-
cred one of the sharpest warnings yet
sent to Mexico and neither was there
any indication of what the govern
ment's next step would be
I The Mexican reply, which accord
ing to its text was prepared at the
direction of President Carranza,
argues in the main that the Mexican
government cannot order the release
Of a prisoner while his case is under
adjudication in the civil courts of one
Of its states and contends that the
American governments demand for
the consular agents release had no
foundation or precedent in interna-
| tional law.
New Angles of Mexican Viewpoint.
! Some new angles of the Mexican
viewpoint on the Jenkins case, hith-
erto unpublished in the United States,
are revealed. The tendency of the
| Mexican argument is TO separate the
Jenkins case into two phases: First,
the situation in which the consular
agent was kidnapped by bandits and
held for ransom, and last. his subse-
quent arrest and Imprisonment by the
| civil authorities of Puebla on a charge
of having 'connived' with the BAN
dts. The note at hand deals with the
latter phase exclusively.
| 1t points out that Jenkins was first
held under what is known to the Mex
| lean penal code as preventative i'm
prisonment," this provision covers q
situation in which a person is suspect
ed of completely in a criminal act He
subsequently was held under a provi-
sion covering formal" Imprisonment,
which under the Mexican penal code
| applies when a magistrate believes
| there is sufficient evidence to estab-
lsh that crime has been committed
| The allegation against Jenkins is that
! he signed conflicting statements re-
garding his KIDNAPPING and therefore
was guilty of falsifying judicial dec
laration." The note says Jenkins has
opportunity to be released on bail in
| the sum of 1000 pesos, the equivalent
to $500 In American money. IL reck-
oned in coin rather than Mexican
bank notes. and that Jenkins has re-
fused to avail himself of it although
| he has been requested to do so.
| Mexican C0nsuls Imprisoned.
Recalling that Mexican consus in
the United States have been impris-
oned and that Mexico has never asked
the United states to waive, local law
in their cases. the note remarks that
the Mexican government cannot con-
cede to American citizens more rights
than MeXicans enjoy in the United
States"
The Mexican note opens with the
observation that the foundation for
the American governments demand
probably "can only be the power of
the country that makes it, and as the
conclusion of a lengthy legal argu-
ment expresses its hope that the state
department will withhold its judg-'
ment on the Jenkins case until the
civil courts in Puebia have passed on
it.
In the note to Mexico the state de-
partment not only demanded the i'm
mediate release of Jenkins but warn
cd Carranza that further molestation
of the consular agent would bring
relations between the two countries to
a precarious point.
Text of Mexican Note.
The text of the note given out at Ell
Paso follows:
Mexico, Nov. 26, 1919
Mr.. George l.. Summerlin, Acting
Charge of Affairs, for the United
States of America.
Sir: / am instructed by the presi-
dent of the republic to answer here
with your note of November 20, which
you addressed to the Mexican govern
ment on instructions from the state
department of the United States.
You will no doubt realize the fact
that, no legal foundation. principle or
precedent of international right, or
even of reason. is invoked in the de-
mand for the immediate liberation of
Mr.. Jenkins, who, as you know. is
present under the jurisdiction of a
judge of the city of Puebla.
The Mexican government cannot see
what the foundation for such a de-
mand might be. 1t believes that it can
be only the power of the country that
makes it, although the United States
has expressed the desire on various oc-
casions that right and justice should
be the basis of its diplomacy, and re-
spect for weak countries the basis Of
its international relations on the con-
tinent
imprisonment Not UNJUST.
The terms of a note which am an
swering are attributed to my govern
ment to an imperfect understanding
of our penal laws. The imprisonment
is neither unjust nor arbitrary. as your
note states since Mr.. Jenkins him
self has signed contradictory state
ments regarding the kidnapping of
which he was a victim The judge has
had ample foundation to suppose that
he was guilty of the crime of falsifying
judicial declarations, and this has
caused his Imprisonment
Nevertheless this imprisonment does
not of itself signify that Mr.. Jenkins
is guilty, because such fact can only
be established by a definitive iudg-
ment.
Your excellency knows that the
proceedings in Mexico in
wolves three classes of imprisonment:
Preventive, when it is suspected that
a person has criminal completely in
an act formal, when against the ac-
cused there is sufficient evidence in
the judgment of the magistrate to sup
posed that the accused is guilty of the
crime; and ordinary imprisonment.
which involves definitive sentence as
the penalty provided for crime and
the guilt of the accused duly proved.
The two first classes of Imprisonment
're not legally penalties, but restric-
tions to the liberty of the accused.
nArdine Investigation The Judgment