The Chattanooga news. [volume] (Chattanooga, Tenn.) 1891-1939, 1919-12-01

oateS decllneS To- be drawn into
judicial discussion of irrelevant
matters or unimportant incidents
Y brought forward in connection
with this case. The Mexican
government cannot be misIed as
It 1ntimated by the citation by
the United States of mo principle
or precedent of international law
and not even reason" for Jen-
kins' release, for obviously no
such citation is necessary for the
enlightenment of a government
OF the present day. The Mexican
government believes, and rightly
SO, that the American request for
jenkins release is not based on
solely the strength of the coun-
try which makes it" for it knows
the request is founded onN the
justice of the right of an Amer
lean citizen and United States
consular office to fair treatment
while residing and discharging
his duties within Mexican juris-
diction with. the knowledge and
approval of the Mexican gov
eminent. The Mexican govern
ment may contend that the i'm
prisonment of the victim Is
necessary for the investigation
by a judge, under the Constant
vigilance of public opinion" of
the truth regarding his abduc-
lion and that alright. of release
ON bail is a. palliative for such
wrongful Imprisonment, but the
United States is constrained to
the opinion that such arguments
are mere excuses. The govern
ment of the United States in
vites and desires the fullest pos
sible examination and investiga-
tion of this case, but it cannot
admit that 1t Is necessary in Or
der to ascertain the facts that
Mr.. Jenkins should be retained in
prison even with the privilege of
applying for bail. My govern
ment will not and is satisfied that
Mr.. Jenkins will not place any
obstacle in the way of COM
plete and full examination of
himself or his witnesses, or of the
events leading up to and con-
nected with his abduction.
The Mexican government prefers
to attribute the American note to
an imperfect knowledge of the Mex
lean penal laws and proceeds to eX-
plain with. refinement the intrica-
cies of Mexican penal proceedings.
But the government of the United
States fails to discern in their ap-
plication in this case at the hands
of the Mexican authority any ap-
Proclamation to impartial treatment
of jenkins and the Mexican govern
ment knows the absence of such
treatment is the reason for the
American request.
Unless Denial of Justice.
THE Mexican government main
tainS that it cannot grant the re-
quest of the United States for Jen-
kins' release for the reason that
under international law no diplo-
matte Intervention is appropriate
unless denial of justice has oc-
Cured and because the Mexican
government is not in a position to
demand Jenkins release, in view of
the separation of the executive and
judicial powers under the Mexican
form of government and the inde-
pendence of the state courts. by one
of which Jenkins is held. The sue
cinct answef%to this contention is
as every one knows, that a denial
of justice has already taken place
and also because the Mexican con-
stitution specifically gives the fed
eral tribunals jurisdiction of all
cases concerning diplomatic agents
and consular afficers.
1.-The United States is not to be
driven by such subtle arguments
into a defense of its request for the
release of Mr.. Jenkins. 1t is for
Mexico to show ccuse for his de-
tention not for the United states
to plead for his liberation. Stripped
of eXtraneous matter with which
the Mexican note of Nov. 26 en-
deavors to clothe it. the naked case
of jenkins stands forth: Jenkins. a
United States consular agent. ac-
credited to the government of
Mexico, is imprisoned for render
ing false judicial testimony" in con-
nection with the abduction of which
he was the victim. This is the
substance of the Mexican note.
pleased to Learn.
My. government is pleased to
learn that the Imprisonment of
Jenkins stands on this single and
well defined ground, and that the
reported statements that Mexican
authorities had caused the impris-
onment of Jenkins because of col
luson with his abductors and re-
bellion against the state are not
seriously regarded by your gov
Crnment.
Prosecuting the Victim.
In whose interest then is the
charge of false swearing brought
against jenkins? His abductors?
He is in eduity the complainant in
the case of his abduction, not the
defendant as the Mexican govern
ment now makes him out to be.
The Mexican government is prose
cutting the victim instead OF the
perpetrators of the crime. Whl!e
the outlaws who endangered MS
life and took away large part
of his fortune, enjoy their free
dom. the Mexican authorities now
deprive jenkins of his liberty.
Moreover. the ground expressed Tor
the Imprisonment of jenkins, name
ly. that he is supposed to be re-
sponsible for the crime OF render
ing false judicial testimony must
be taken--and my government di-
rects special attention TO this point
--as merely an expression OF opin-