No. 422.
Mr. Manning to Mr. Bayard.

No. 28.]

Sir: Referring to my No. 25, of 30th ultimo, with inclosures, relative to the position of the United States Government with regard to the doctrine of involuntary change of allegiance, as embodied in Article 1, Chapter V, of the Mexican Law of Foreigners, I have the honor to transmit [Page 678] herewith copy and translation of Mr. Mariscal’s reply of 1st instant (see Inclosure No. 1 in my No. 25) upon that subject in which he says:

In reply, I have the honor to say to your excellency that I have noted all that you are pleased to state to me regarding this matter; but I can not nor should n6t discuss with your legation the right which Mexico has to issue laws that emanate directly from the provisions of its constitution, unless some practical case arises to give occasion to such debate. Your excellency will, therefore, not be surprised that on this” occasion I leave unanswered your arguments against Article 1, Chapter V, of the law referred to.

I am, etc.,

Th C. Manning.
[Inclosure in No. 28.—Translation.]

Mr. Mariscal to Mr. Manning.

Mr. Minister: I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your excellency’s note dated yesterday, in which you are pleased to inform me, under instructions from your Government, and with reference to Article 1 of Chapter V of the law of foreigners and of naturalization, of May 28 of the current year, that the United States, while claiming for aliens within its jurisdiction and conceding to American citizens in other jurisdictions the right of expatriation, has always maintained that the transfer of allegiance should be by a distinctly voluntary act; and that the loss of citizenship can not be imposed as a penalty nor a new national status forced as a favor by one Government upon the citizens of another.

In this connection your excellency sees fit to state that the notice given by your legation to the United States consuls and to American citizens to the effect that the latter would be considered by the Mexican Government as Mexican citizens unless they complied with certain legal requisites cannot be interpreted as an admission of the right of Mexico to change by legislative decrees the national status of foreigners without their consent.

In reply, I have the honor to say to your excellency that I have noted all that you are pleased to state to me regarding this matter; but can not or should not discuss with your legation the right which Mexico has to issue laws that emanate directly from the provisions of its constitution, unless some practical case arises to give occasion to such debate. Your excellency will, therefore, not be surprised that on this occasion I leave unanswered your arguments against Article 1, Chapter V, of the law referred to.

I renew, etc.,

Igno. Mariscal.