No. 221.
Mr. Langston to Mr. Frelinghuysen.
Port au Prince, Hayti , July 7, 1884. (Received July 25.)
Sir: Referring to your dispatch No. 272, dated April 21, 1884, having reference to the arrest and imprisonment of Mr. O. A. Yan Bokkelen in this city, I have to state that I have given such subject due investigation; and beg now to submit that it is true that, in accordance with the law of this country, which permits the imprisonment of debtors, on or about the 6th of March last, Mr. Yan Bokkelen was arrested and imprisoned, upon a judgment rendered against him some months before for some $3,000 in favor of Messrs. Toplitz & Co., of New York City.
With regard to the suit of Messrs. Toplitz & Co. against Mr. Yan Bokkelen it is proper to state that it seems to have been thoroughly contested as between the parties thereto in the lower and upper courts of the country, having been commenced in what is called here the court of commerce, and finally reviewed and passed upon in the court of last resort, the court of cassation.
[Page 308]Having been arrested and imprisoned as indicated, other parties to whom Mr. Van Bokkelen was indebted, the National Bank, Louis Nadal, and Saint Aude, instituted proceedings also against him upon their several claims as allowed by Haytien law and usage, which worked other and additional confinement in prison.
But after his arrest and confinement upon the judgment of Messrs. Toplitz & Co. it was, upon certain proceedings instituted by Mr. Van Bokkelen in the civil tribunal, decided that his imprisonment upon such judgment was not legal, for the reason that Mr. Archin, the lawyer of such parties, in ordering the arrest and imprisonment of Mr. Yan Bokkelen had done so without special authority in that behalf as required by the law of this country, and so the matter stands to day so far as the judgment of Messrs. Toplitz & Co. is concerned, for no amended proceeding has been instituted in that regard as against Mr. Van Bokkelen. He has been confined since the finding and judgment of the civil tribunal referred to upon the recommendation, as the Haytien law phrases the proceeding, of the other creditors named.
But subsequently to the rendition of the judgment in favor of Messrs. Toplitz & Co. against Mr. Van Bokkelen, the latter undertook to make, under the laws of Hayti, a judicial assignment of all his property, in favor of his creditors generally, and thus secure for himself what is termed in French law language, le bénefice de la cession de biens, as provided for all Haytien debtors under the law of this country. Mr. Van Bokkelen in this proceeding would not deny that he is a foreigner, an American citizen, residing in Hajti. But he claims that although he is a foreigner, being an American citizen, under the treaty of 1864, articles 6 and 9, in spite of any language contained in the civil code of Hayti discriminating in the particular mentioned, against foreigners, even though the phrase used therein be “les étrangers,” he is by the treaty put upon the same footing, as to this right and its exercise, with the Haytien himself. The civil tribunal, however, of this city, in which he instituted his procedings, as indicated, has decided against him as to his right.
The case is to be appealed, as it is understood, to the court of cassation, where it is possible, though not probable, that the judgment of the under court may be reversed.
Meantime Mr. Van Bokkelen, who, at my request, not being well at all, has been permitted to occupy quarters in the military hospital of this city, remains in what is understood to be confinement.
I have watched this case of Mr. Van Bokkelen from the very moment of its beginning, I have no doubt that under the law of this country, properly interpreted and applied, in connection with the treaty of 1864 as already mentioned, Mr. Van Bokkelen has a right to make an assignment of his property in the interest of his creditors, as he seeks to do judicially, and should thereupon be released from prison.
In a conversation with the President yesterday, with regard to this case, I advised him that I might, at an early day, have occasion to address his Government with relation thereto, having in mind, as I did at the time, that the prison of this city is really not fit for the confinement of a debtor, that the military hospital is very little better, and that Mr. Van Bokkelen is quite unwell, suffering from rheumatism and predisposition to consumption.
I await any instructions which the Department may deem it wise to give in this case.
I am, &c.,