No. 615.
Mr. Cramer to Mr.
Bayard.
Legation of
the United States,
Berne, March 9, 1885.
(Received March 23.)
No. 209.]
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.,
[Inclosure 1 in No.
209.—Translation.]
The Swiss Federal Council
to Mr. Cramer.
Referring to the valued note from the minister resident of the United
States of America of February 19, relative to the expulsion of Mr. Henry
Theodore Christian Emeis, a citizen of the United States, the Swiss
Federal Council has the honor to communicate to him a copy of a report
from the police department of the canton of Neuchâtel, dated February
24, together with copies of a correspondence between the police director
of La Chaux-de-fonds and the central department of police of the canton
of Neuchâtel.
In this connection the Swiss Federal Council observes that in case the
minister resident of the United States, after having taken knowledge of
said documents, is in a position to give a positive declaration that Mr.
Emeis is neither an anarchist nor an agent
provocateur, i. e., an agent that provokes to sedition, it (the
Federal Council) would not hesitate to submit to the authorities of
Neuchâtel such an assurance, in a recommendatory sense, to their
favorable consideration. Moreover, it has been noticed that said man, as
soon as he had obtained knowledge of the arrest of anarchists and of the
investigations and house-searchings instituted against them, disappeared
from Berne.
The Swiss Federal Council, in having the honor to return herewith the
inclosure of said valued note, avails itself, &c.
In the name of the Swiss Federal Council.
The President of the Swiss Confederation,
The chancellor of the Swiss Confederation,
[Page 801]
[Inclosure 2 in No.
209.—Translation.]
The police department of the
republic and canton of Neuchâtel to the federal department of justice and police at
Berne.
Neuchâtel, February 24,
1885.
Mr. Federal Councilor:
The motive which has determined as to decide upon the expulsion of Mr.
Emeis is that he has furnished the police with false information
concerning his personality and his antecedents. After having declared
that he was a German subject, originating from Schleswig-Holstein, and
finding himself without documents of legitimation, he ended by
exhibiting an American passport which has been delivered to him as a
citizen of the United States. After having maintained that he came from
Davos, pressed by questions about the circumstances of his sojourn at
that place, he confessed that he had not been there for some years past.
In turn it resulted in his personal declarations that he has recently
sojourned at Göschenen, where, as you know, a deposit of dynamite is
located.
These facts being given, and the singular way of carriage of the person,
certain suspicious talks held by him at a dinner-table and taken down by
an editor of a journal who ate with him, we have had the honor to inform
you, and we have pronounced his expulsion from the canton of Neuchâtel.
Besides, it would be rather difficult to say whether one should consider
this individual as an anarchist, or as an agent of a foreign police, the
conduct of the one and of the other resembling each other very much.
Be pleased, &c.,
The councilor of state, chief of the department of police,
[Inclosure 3 in No.
209.—Translation.]
The director of the local
police to the central department of
police, Neuchátel.
Chaux-de-fonds, January 19,
1885.
Sir: We have actually in our city a certain
Henry Theodore Christian Emeis, who affirms that he came from the
province of Schleswig-Holstein, where he is a doctor of medicine. He
does not practice here, but says he came on account of his health, and
will only remain here a few weeks longer. He is the bearer of no papers,
and has given to understand that he will leave immediately on the
melting of the snow, and that for that reason he considers it
superfluous to have his documents of birth sent to him at the moment of
his departure. According to his statement he has also sojourned at
Davos, where he says he was allowed to remain in peace.
This individual lives in our town at the Côté d’Or, and will leave
immediately if he is pressed for his documents. To you as well as to the
prefect I state this case because of the doings which agitate Germany
and other foreign parts.
Believe me, &c.,
The director of the local police,
[Inclosure 4 in No. 209.]
The police department to
the director of the local police at La
Chaux-de-fonds.
Neuchâtel, January 22,
1885.
Sir: In reply to your letter of the 19th
instant, we beg to inform you that we will tolerate the presence of
Henry Theodore Christian Emeis at La Chaux-de-fonds if he can prove that
he sojourned at Davos before his arrival in your town.
Believe me, &c.,
In the name of the police department,
[Page 802]
[Inclosure 5 in No. 209.]
The director of the local
police to the central department of
police, Neuchátet.
Chaux-de-fonds, January 24,
1885.
Sir: To carry out the instructions of your
dispatch of the 22d instant concerning Henry Theodore Christian Emeis, I
sent for this amateur to come to my office and communicated to him your
decision. After some hesitation he declared that he had not been at
Davos for some years past, and, moreover, that he was no longer a
German, but an American citizen, and finally produced the passport,
which I herewith inclose, and which you will kindly return.
Regarding the observations which I have made on the subject of his first
and second statements, he replied that he did not think that one would
be so exacting, that he had not understood me well, and other such more
or less evasive remarks.
Believe me, &c.,
The director of the local police,
[Inclosure 6 in No.
209.—Translation.]
Neuchâtel, March 6,
1885.
The department of police declares that in consequence of new information
it has received which is of a nature to invalidate the suspicion of
which Dr. Emeis, of American nationality, has been the object, the order
of expulsion pronounced against him has been revoked, so that he can
freely sojourn in the canton of Neuehâtel, provided he deposits his
papers and takes a permit to sojourn.
[Inclosure 7 in No. 209.]
Mr. Cramer to the
President of the Swiss
Confederation.
Legation of the United States,
Berne, March 7,
1885.
Sir: The undersigned, minister resident of the
United States of America near the Swiss Confederation, has the honor to
acknowledge the receipt of your Excellency’s valued note of the 5th of
this month, together with the three documents contained therein relative
to the expulsion of Mr. Henry Theodore Christian Emeis, an American
citizen from the canton of Neuchâtel.
After having carefully considered the contents of your Excellency’s
valued note and of the documents referred to, as well as the statements
made by Mr. Emeis in his own behalf, the undersigned has the honor to
say that he believes Mr. Emeis to be neither an anarchist nor an agent provocateur, and that the suspicion
attached to him as such arose from an unfortunate misunderstanding
between him and the police authorities of La Chaux-de-fonds.
Relative to the fact that Mr. Emeis “disappeared” from Berne on the
morning of the arrest of the anarchists, that is, on Friday, February 27
last, the undersigned begs to suggest that it was a mere coincidence,
for on Thursday, February 26, Mr. Emeis called at this legation and said
he was going to Geneva on the following day, although he knew absolutely
nothing of the intended arrest of anarchists on that day.
Besides, as soon as he had read in Der Bund of
March 3d, a notice to the effect that he had mysteriously or
suspiciously “disappeared” from Berne, he immediately returned, called,
at my advice, on the editors of that journal, and requested them to
correct the false impression made by said notice; otherwise he would be
obliged to institute legal proceedings against them. Such a correction
appeared in that journal of the 7th of this month.
In addition to all this Mr. Emeis, in the face of the decree of
expulsion, went, on the 6th of this month, to Neuchâtel, called on Mr.
Cornaz, president of the council of state, and chief of the police
department of that canton, and stated the real nature of his case. Upon
a personal examination thereof, Mr. Cornaz, too, found that this affair
arose from an unfortunate misunderstanding, issued an order, duly signed
and sealed, revoking the decree of expulsion, and handed it to Mr.
Emeis. The undersigned has the honor to inclose herewith a copy of said
order.
In thanking the High Federal Council for the willingness it has expressed
to aid, under a given declaration in procuring a revocation of the
decree of expulsion pronounced against Mr. Emeis, the undersigned avails
himself, &c.,
