cordance with the Constitution and laws of Louisiana, had become citizens of that State and eligible to office. Our government, under these circumstances, while reserving, for the moment, its decision, suggested to the Italian government whether as against the United States it had "any right or duty of reclamation." 67 § 535. Government citizen's agent.-Mr. Olney, Secretary of State, declared that in securing indemnity for injuries inflicted upon a citizen, the government that presents the claim is, in truth, the citizen's agent. Any legal or equitable defense, he contended, that is good as against the citizen himself is equally good as against his representative. An individual, in his view, who participates in making the laws and electing the officers of one government must be held to estop himself from complaining of that government to any other; and, he maintained, he is not distinguishable, in point of principle, but is to be identified with the body politic of which he is a member. "He may not approve of a particular act of that body," said Mr. Olney, "but he contributes to the power which enables it to do any or all acts. As a matter of fact, indeed, his vote may have brought about the very legislation or elected the very officer responsible for the injury of which he complains. "The soundness of the position, therefore, that an international reclamation will not lie against a Government when the beneficiary of the claim by taking part in the organization and administration of that Government has in effect given his assent to its proceedings, seems to be supported by every consideration of justice and equity. These considerations, which go to the duty of the Italian Government in the premises, are re-enforced by the absence of any real interest on its part. The wrongs done at Hahnville, on account of which its intercession is asked, were to persons who had abandoned Italian soil and had ceased to be part of the population of the kingdom, and who added nothing to its productive capacity or to its military strength. To intercede as asked, therefore, is to use the credit and prestige and power of the Italian Government on behalf of persons, or the representatives of persons, whose fate and fortunes were at the time of the For. Rel. 1896, 407, 410, 411. Mr. Olney, Secretary of State, to Baron Fava, Italian Ambassador. infliction of the wrongs complained of no real concern to that Government.'' 68 $536. Contention of Italian ambassador.-Baron Fava, the Italian ambassador, in response, contended that the question at issue was the application of the fundamental principle of law and justice, that the persons accused were to be deemed innocent un nor 6 For. Rel. 1896, 407, 410, 411. He then proceeded to point out the distinction between this and other cases, and said: "In bringing the Hahnville cases to the notice of the State Department your excellency has evidently been under the impression that they resemble in all substantial particulars the cases of certain Italians lynched in New Orleans in 1891, and of certain others lynched in Walsenburg, Colo., in 1894. But in the last-named cases there was neither allegation proof that the persons killed had ever taken part in the political affairs of a State or of the United States by qualifying as voters and actually voting at elections. In the New Orleans cases, out of the eleven persons of Italian extraction who were lynched, two were American citizens; five had declared their intent to become United States citizens and had voted; of the remaining four, three had neither voted nor declared their intent to become United States citizens, while one had declared such intent, but had not voted. To the four persons last mentioned the representations of your Government and its demands upon the United States through you were expressly limited, as appears by reference to the correspondence on the subject between yourself and the State Department. It is true that the Italian consul at New Orleans, in a note to the district attorney, argued that the Italian Government could rightfully intervene on behalf of the five persons who had declared their intent to become United States citizens and had voted, and that the district attorney in a note to the Attorney General controverted that view. But no position of the Italian consul, though brought to your notice, was ever adopted by you-it was never discussed between the two Governments. The note announcing your departure from Washington by order of your Government specifies only four Italian subjects on account of whom demands had been made upon this Government, and the incident, when settled, was settled by the payment of a lump sum, the application of which was left wholly to the Italian Government. The result is that the subject to which the attention of the Italian Government is now invited is one upon which the two Governments in their relations to each other stand wholly uncommitted. It is not, therefore, permissible to doubt that the question will be examined and passed upon by each in an enlightened spirit and with a sincere purpose not only to dispose of the particular matter in hand, but to ascertain and fix a just and proper rule for the determination of all like questions hereafter arising." For. Rel. 1896, 407, 410, 411. til found guilty by judicial process, and that what the position and responsibility of the persons murdered, or the apparent criminality of the persons lynched might have been, was unimportant. The evidence showed, he maintained, negligence on the part of the local authorities in failing to protect the prisoners, and to apprehend and prosecute the lynchers, and that such proceedings as had been taken could not but tend to encourage similar outrages in the future. He called attention to the fact that naturalization could be granted by the federal laws exclusively, and not by the State laws, and that mere declaration of intention did not confer citizenship.69 He declared that no matter what the laws of Louisiana might be, and although they might have voted as electors, they were not citizens of the United States, because they had not complied with the provisions of the Revised Statutes regulating naturalization. He called attention to certain cases in which it was held that the power of naturalization was exclusively in Congress,70 and also to the opinion of counsel upon the status of electors who were not citizens, in which it was stated: "The alien elector has certain privileges in the matter of voting in Louisiana, and in a few other states, granted to him in anticipation of a future naturalization which may never ripen into citizenship, and that is all. But he has not yet crossed the Rubicon. He has not been naturalized under the act of Congress. He is still under the allegiance of the foreign government, and competent to place himself under the aegis of its protection." He argued that this was sufficient to show that as the Italians had not complied with the requirements of the provisions on the subject of naturalization contained in the Revised Statutes, they still maintained their capacity as Italian subjects.71 For. Rel. 1896, 412, 414, 418, 421, 422. 70 Chirac V. Chirac, 2 Citing Wheat. 269, L. ed. 234. "For. Rel. 1896, 412, 414. He said that without prejudice to the incontestable Italian nationality of the Italians, he did not hesitate to enter upon an examination of the other points relative to their status, and proceeded: "It is stated by the special agent of your Department that Salardino, Arena and Ventureila had voted at the political elections in Louisiana; that Arena had taken out his first naturalization papers, while it is to be presumed that the two others had done the same, as they also had presented themselves at the elections; and that all three had definitely fixed their domicile in the United States. § 537. Italians voting.-Baron Fava said that the entire solution of the difficulty was found in the treaty in force between the United States and Italy. He again presented the request "that the guilty parties be sought and brought to justice; that steps be "I do not know what were the sources of this information; as, however, they are wholly at variance with that furnished the authorities of Louisiana, and with that which I have received from the Italian consulate at New Orleans, I must beg your excellency to inform me: (a) In what registers and under what date the three Italians are inscribed as electors; (b) from which of the five Federal courts of Louisiana Arena had received his first papers; (c) when, and to whom, the three Italians had declared that they had fixed their domicile in the United States. . .... "But even if Salardino, Arena and Venturella had voted at the elections, and even if the laws of Louisiana attached great importance to that fact, how could this affect the well-proved fact that they were not American citizens? "The first, Salardino, had resided fully twelve years in Louisiana, and even if he voted, he had not taken out either his first or second naturalization papers. Arena, according to the special agent, had only taken out his first papers, and his attempts to become an American citizen had stopped there. Venturella does not appear to have done even this, as the said special agent could not find either his certificate of first declaration or that of Salardino. All three had had time to ask for their first and second papers. Why did they not do so? The mere fact of having voted would not have conferred upon any of the three the right of citizenship, as is amply shown in the inclosed memorandum; and if they voted, they voted illegally, and probably because they had been misled by native politicians in search of voters, legal or illegal. "But there is more to be said. The four Italians who were lynched at Walsenburg on the 14th of March, 1895, Francesco Ronchietto, Stanislao Vittone, Pietro Giacobino and Antonia Gobette, had solemnly declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, and to renounce forever all submission and allegiance to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, and especially the King of Italy, and they all were in possession of their first naturalization papers. Notwithstanding this, and in spite of those solemn declarations, when I informed the Federal Government of the murders which had been committed, Mr. Uhl came to my house and expressed the President's regret for that bloody act, and your honorable predecessor and your excellency yourself, deeply impressed with a sense of the duties which the Government of the Union has assumed toward a friendly power by virtue of treaties, did not raise the slightest objection; you all immediately recognized the Italian nationality of the four victims, and a suitable indemnity, recommended by your Department and by the President, was granted to the bereaved families. In view of this precedent, it can hardly be maintained that the subject to which you have now taken to prevent the repetition of such atrocious crimes, and that at the same time, just and adequate compensation be made to the families of the victims." In a subsequent letter, he said relative. to the suggestion whether the Italian government can or cannot called my attention is one of those as to which the two Governments are entirely uncommitted. "And lastly, the fact that the three victims had been in the United States for several years cannot be cited as a proof of their deliberate 'animus manendi.' If they had not been residing here temporarily, as asserted by your note, they would have sent for their families, whom they had left in Italy, where they had their domicile, and whom they supported from here by their labor, Venturella his wife and seven children, Arena his wife and four-yearold son, and Salardino his old father, who was unable to earn his living. Under these circumstances, and however long and continuous their absence from Italy might have been, it cannot be said that they had transferred their domicile to Louisiana, nor had they no intention of returning to their native land, nor that they were not contributing to the resources and wealth of their own country. They had come here on business; that is to say, to provide by the fruits of their labor for the comfort of their wives, children, and parents, and they were thus contributing to the wealth of the country in which they had their home. "Nor is the other assertion, that they had withdrawn from military service, correct. By the two affidavits which I have the honor to submit to you (inclosures 5 and 6) the signers declare under oath: "(a) That Guiseppe Venturella had performed his regular military service in the artillery, and that he landed in the United States with a regular passport in his possession. "(b) That Salvatore Arena had not performed any military service, because, as an only son, he was enrolled in the third class, and that when he arrived in the United States, he was in possession of a regular passport. "(c) And lastly, that Lorenzo Salardino had never performed any military service, because he, too, as an only son, was enrolled in the third class, and that he came to the United States with a regular Italian passport. "I cannot follow your excellency in the views expressed by you as to a Government demanding indemnity for injuries inflicted upon one of its own subjects, being the agent of said injured subject. In that case the American Government would be, near that of the Sultan, the agent of the missionaries, in behalf of whom it is now demanding indemnities. Every Government owes it to itself to protect, within the bounds of justice, its own subjects, however poor and humble, and it would otherwise lose the respect of civilized nations. "Referring to the other lynching which occurred in New Orleans in 1891, and which you mention in your note, I must correct a statement contained in that note, which statement is absolutely and entirely incorrect. Of the eleven persons who were victims of that savage slaughter, two were American citizens, four were |