Mr. Cramer to Mr. Bayard .
Berne , March 9, 1885. (Received March 23.)
Sir: Referring to my dispatch No. 204, of the 20th ultimo, and its inclosure, both relating to the case of Mr. Henry Theodore Christian Emeis, an American citizen, who was expelled from the territory of the canton of Neuchâtel, Switzerland, during February last, under the suspicion of being either an anarchist or an agent provocateur, I have now the honor to inform you that on the evening of the 6th instant I received a note from the President of the Swiss Confederation, dated the 5th instant, in reply to my note to him of the 19th ultimo (a copy of which I inclosed in my dispatch to the Department above referred to), in which he communicated to this legation (1) a copy of a letter from the police department of Neuchâtel to the Swiss Federal Council; (2) copies of notes that passed between the local police authorities of the town of La Chaux-de-fonds (from which town Mr. Emeis had been expelled) and the central police department of the Canton of Neuchâtel.
Copies of all these notes, with translations thereof, are herewith inclosed.
These notes are supposed to furnish the reasons on account of which Mr. Emeis was expelled from the canton of Neuchâtel.
It will be remembered that in my note to the President of the Swiss Confederation of the 19th ultimo I stated that in my opinion the expulsion of Mr. Emeis was the result of an unfortunate misunderstanding between the latter and the police authorities of La Chaux-de-fonds, and that I requested the High Federal Council to cause a revocation of the decree of expulsion.
It will also be noticed that the High Federal Council stated in its note of the 5th instant that if, after having taken knowledge of the documents inclosed therein, I was in a position to give a positive declaration that Mr. Emeis is neither an anarchist nor an agent provocateur, it would recommend to the authorities of Neuchâtel the revocation of said decree. It is further stated in that note that it had been noticed that Mr. Emeis had “disappeared” from Berne as soon as he had knowledge of the arrest of anarchists in this city.
In regard to this last statement an explanation is due to Mr. Emeis, which will show that his “disappearance” from Berne on the day the anarchists were arrested here was a mere unforeseen coincidence. On Thursday, February 26, Mr. Emeis called at this legation and informed me that on the following day (that is, on Friday, February 27) he was going to Geneva, as the climate there is better than in Berne, and requested me to forward to him any news about his case. It so happened that on said Friday (February 27), early in the morning, a number of anarchists were arrested. Nobody knew anything about these contemplated arrests (except the proper authorities) until after they had taken place. Certainly neither Mr. Emeis nor this legation had any previous knowledge of the same. It so happened, too, that a few days thereafter a paragraph appeared in a daily journal published in this city, alluding to the “mysterious disappearance” of Mr. Emeis, and otherwise damaging to his character. As soon as he had read said paragraph he took the next train for Berne, called at this legation (that is, on Thursday, March 5), and asked my advice. I advised him (1) [Page 800] to present himself to the police authorities and ask for a regular permit of sojourn in Berne; (2) to call on the editors of said journal and request them to retract their derogatory statements about him, otherwise he would be obliged to institute legal proceedings against them; and (3) to proceed to Neuchâtel, notwithstanding the decree of expulsion, call at the central police headquarters of that canton, state his case, and ask for an immediate investigation thereof. He acted upon my advice, and the result was that on Saturday, the 7th instant, he called at this legation, stating that the journal in question had retracted its remarks against him, and showing me an order, issued on the 6th instant in due legal form by the president of the council of state of Neuchâtel (who is also chief of the cantonal police department), to the effect that in consequence of fresh information having been received, invalidating the suspicions of which Mr. Emeis had been the object, the decree of his expulsion had been revoked, and that he is at liberty to freely sojourn in that canton. A copy of this order, with a translation thereof, is herewith inclosed.
It being evident from the note of the Swiss President of the 5th instant that the High Federal Council was then not yet entirely satisfied as to the character of Mr. Emeis, I felt it my duty to address another note to the same, repeating the opinion I expressed in my first note as to the character of this gentleman, and as to his expulsion having been the result of an unfortunate misunderstanding, corroborated, as it was, by the opinion of the authorities of the canton of Neuchâtel, and at the same time I inclosed a copy of the decree of revocation. A copy of this note is herewith inclosed.
This case is now settled to the entire satisfaction of Mr. Emeis. I trust the Department is also satisfied with the manner in which it has been conducted by this legation.
I have, &c.,