Your circular enclosing duplicate copies of the President’s proclamation
of September 3d, is received; also your letter No. 16, containing the
President’s letter of ceremony to the Grand Duke of Baden, which will be
promptly forwarded through the proper channel.
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.
Mr. Bancroft to Prince Hohenlohe.
Legation of the United States of
America, Berlin,
October 4, 1867.
Mr. Minister President: I have received
your letter under the date of the 25th of September, and I make
haste to express the pleasure I have derived from the recognition,
by the royal Bavarian government, of the inherent right of every man
to change his country and his allegiance. This well-approved and
firmly settled principle of the old Roman law was the rule of the
best organized part of the civilized world more than two thousand
years ago, and was ever attended in practice by the best results, as
clearly appears from the emphatic language of the great Roman
statesman and lawyer.
“O jura preclara, atque divinitus jam inde a principio Romani nominis
a majoribus nostris comparata ! ne quis nostrum plus quam unius
civitatis esse possit; ne quis invitus civitate mutetur; neve in
civitate maneat invitus. Haec enim sunt fundamenta firmíssima
nostrse libertatis, sui quemque juris et retinendi et dimittendi
esse dominum.” (Cieiro pro Balbo, Cap. 13.)
A formal adhesion to this well-settled principle was to have been
expected from the enlightened country whose august monarchs have
been famous throughout the world for their liberal care for the
culture of the sciences and arts; and on this subject not the
American Secretary of State only, but the President and Congress,
and, indeed, the whole people of the United States, will render the
due tribute to the just and enlightened views of the Bavarian
government.
But in reference to the question raised respecting the nature and
effect of emigration, I must beg leave to observe that an emigrant
and a naturalized citizen are not exactly convertible terms. He who
removes from one country to settle in another is assuredly already
an emigrant; and his subsequent change of allegiance in some measure
affects retrospectively his relations towards his mother country in
the interval during which the change was in progress.
From the fact that America is a nation composed exclusively of
emigrants and their descendants, the questions of international law
bearing upon the relations of emigrants to their old homes have, in
a peculiar manner, engaged the closest attention of American
statesmen; and after long continued and, as is believed, impartial
research, continued through more than one generation, they have been
forced to the conclusion, “that the naturalized migrant cannot be
made responsible on his return for any military duty, unless he had
been actually required to perform it before his emigration. We do
not recognize the binding obligation of contingent duties depending
for their performance upon time and other future circumstances.”
This view of the subject is simple and natural, and obviously just.
The opposite view is attended by contradictions and difficulties,
and might be used to defeat the right of emigration.
Great Britain is the country which suffers the largest diminution of
its able-bodied population, especially of its mariners, by
emigration to the United States. Yet for more than fifty years it
has given over all claims to service from its emigrants, and has
never fixed a penalty on an emigrant for failing to appear on a
summons. The views of the government of France after long discussion
are in harmony with those of the United States.
I persuade myself that in like manner a statesman so wise as Prince
Hohenlohe, and of such large and comprehensive views, will on
further consideration adopt the solution of the question as it
practically prevails in Great Britain and France; especially if he
will but present to his mind in all their force the circumstances
that have irresistibly led American statesmen to the adoption of the
principle which I have cited, and which forms a standing instruction
to all the ministers and diplomatic agents of the United States.
[Page 592]
From these considerations I would, therefore, again commend the case
of Mr. Bardroff to the benevolent consideration of Prince Hohenlohe.
From all that appears Mr. Bardroff is a brave and honest man, who
obtained his naturalization in a fair and honorable manner; and it
will be very agreeable for me to be enabled to assure my government
that he has been relieved from the effects of a sentence for
non-appearance in Bavaria after emigration. The benefit to the
Bavarian government by the execution of the sentence must be very
trivial, while surely Prince Hohenlohe will agree that the sentence,
as passed upon an absent man who had violated no law and fled from
no actual obligation, is a very hard one.
In the great movement of the nations, the United States and Bavaria
meet but rarely; let us take care, as far as we can, that whenever
they do meet, their respective agents may be equally animated by
moderation and love of justice, and that the few opportunities of
official intercourse that are offered may only tend to advance the
friendship of the two countries.
It further deserves to be remembered that the emigrants to America
benefit the country from which they emigrate by promoting commerce
between their old and new homes. Moreover, just in proportion as
they thrive, they turn a part of their resources to the benefit of
their family and friends in the country of their birth, following in
this the example of that illustrious adopted citizen of Bavaria,
Count Rumford, who was faithful to his new allegiance and at the
same time left evidences of his abiding love for America.
In conclusion I request you to accept the assurance of my highest
esteem.
His Serene Highness Prince Hohenlohe
Shillingsfürst, Minister Resident of
Foreign Affairs, Munich.