Evening star., 1925-07-06

were slaves. They were feudaI prom
erty of the lords of the land, forbidden
by law and by magisteriaI commit.
ment from leaving the land without
the consent of the proprietor-the
owner being the magistrate. The pre-
tense was that the peon was in debt
TO the proprietor, and that debt must
be paid before he would be permitted
to depart.
The present law does not recognize
slavery, but 1t does forbid a debtor
to leave HIS proprietor without dis
charging his debt-and the owner sees
to it that such discharge rs not made.
Generation after generation of poems,
therefore. remain on the same hacien-
da, receiving ridiculously small pay
and never able to rise out of their
dependency.
When the agrarians undertook to
overthrow the Oiaz government, it
was pledged that If the progressives
gained control, a new division of the
land would be made, and that the vast
acres would be divided. The new con-
stitution of 1917 so provided that the
great estates should be taken over by
the government, and paid for with
state bonds or money, and then sold
on long terms to the former poems
Also the constitution provided that
thereafter all oil and minerals which
were at that date still in the ground
should be the property of the state.
X 4
1t is recognized that Mexicans are
unquestionably within their rights in
making and adopting whatever con-
stitution they want, except that they
have no right to confiscate property
belonging to foreigners without paying
fair price for ii. Mere promises to
pay in the future-when similar
pledges are notoriously neglected-are
not satisfactory when actual property
| is seized. Yet, it is charged by Secre-
tary Kellogg tand the charges are
based upon reports from Ambassador
Sheffield), that much land and oil have
, been confiscated by the Mexican gov
| ernment for which no settlement has
been made.
Two years ago-just before the
! United States granted recognition to
the Obregon government-there was a
conference between official representa-
tives of the two governments for the
purpose Of arriving at a settlement of
the question of Mexico's seizure of
American property. At that confer
ence the Mexicans explained" that,
in all cases where the property had
been acquired prior to the adoption of
the 1917 constitution, 1t was recog-
nized as not being subject to expro-
priation for division. In all cases
where title dated since the new con-
stitution the property would be taken,
the same as il owned by a Mexican
citizen, but it would be paid for at 10
per cent advance over the appraised
valuation for taxing. Americans al
| lege that this distinction has not been
maintained, and that, Furthermore,
when their property has been seized
either Oil land or hacienda-it has not
been paid for.
There is no intimation that leads to
any fear of military enforcement of
| American rights. In modern practice
| there are other ways of maintaining
international justice which must be
exhausted first. International bank
ers now refrain from giving credits
| to foreign governments without the
approval of the state department. of
| their own r country. If American
| finance be closed to Mexico her in
terest on foreign bonds will not be
met and her credit will be sacrificed.
While we "recnogized" Mexico two
years ago, that action was based on
| her construction of the safety of in
vestment; IL now she repudiates such
pledge that recognition may be re-
versed. With such withdrawal by the
| United States would come similar ac-
ton by France and other countries.
England has pot yet recognized Mex
| leo, for the same reason as that which
now disturbs confidence in America.
Copyright. 1925, b. Rsui X COliins.l