No. 293.
Mr. von
Schlözer to Mr. Evarts.
Washington, February 25, 1880.
Esteemed Mr. Secretary of State: I had the honor duly to receive the note which you were kind enough to address to me, under date of April 17, 1879, in reference to the cook Weinrebe, who was arrested on board of the steamer Mosel. The foreign office at Berlin, to which I transmitted that note, is of the [Page 462] opinion that the government of the United States gives to Article XII, paragraph 2, of the consular convention of December 11, 1871, and especially to the words “examination and search,” an interpretation which differs from that of the imperial government, and which seems specially to limit the signification of those two words.
I am consequently instructed to lay before you the following:
In concluding the treaty of December 11, 1877, the imperial government acted on the supposition that paragraph 2 of Article XII referred to all official acts on board of a vessel, and that such official acts could not, therefore, be performed by the authorities of one of the contracting states on board of a vessel of the other state without previous notice having been given to the consul of that state.
In the English text of the treaty the term “search of merchant vessels” was therefore selected, which, according to American usage, is equivalent to visit or visitation of vessels (J. Bouvier, Law Dictionary, adapted to the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, vol. II, p. 505, s. v. Right of Search.)
In the present case United States custom-house officers went on board of the German vessel, and there examined Weinrebe’s effects, after obtaining, it is true, the consent of the proper deck officer, but without having previously notified the imperial consul-general at New York.
I should be obliged to you, esteemed Mr. Secretary of State, if you would have the kindness to inform me whether the interpretation given by the imperial government to the article in question of the consular convention meets with your approval.
Accept, &c.,