Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress, With the Annual Message of the President, December 3, 1888, Part I
No. 475.
Mr. Coleman to Mr. Bayard.
Berlin, October 11, 1888. (Received October 29.)
Sir: I have the honor to inclose herewith a report of a so called “military cases,” requiring intervention with the foreign office, which I Have prepared for the period included between November 8, 1887, and the date of this dispatch. Seven such cases, Nos. 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, and 189 have been submitted and decided—all favorably—during the period referred to. One case, No. 176, designated as unfinished in the report of November 8, 1887, is reported herewith. There are three cases, all relating to fines, presented during that period which are still pending.
The marked decrease in the number of cases occurring during the past year as compared with previous periods of the same length, and their favorable settlement, would seem to afford just grounds for satisfaction.
I have, etc.,
For the Minister.
Report on military cases.
176. Albert Bernhard:
Born at Mülhausen, Alsace, September 28, 1845; emigrated to the United States in May, 1872; naturalized October 23, 1878; returned in August, 1880, to his native place, where he still resided at last accounts, the circumstances indicating it to be his intention to reside there permanently. Bernhard has claimed indemnification of the German Government for losses sustained in consequence of his arrest and imprisonment in Alsace in 1887, on a charge of participation in a seditious conspiracy. This case has been the subject of laborious and painstaking investigation on the part of the Department of State and the legation, and the records of the latter contain forty-six communications exchanged in the course of the correspondence relating to the same, In the last report of the so-called military cases made by the legation, under date of November 8, 1887, Bernhard’s case was designated as unfinished. It may now be regarded as finished in view of the report thereon prepared by the Department of State, under date of April 19, 1888, and transmitted to this legation for its files with instruction No. 315, of April 28, 1888. The completeness of the latter report, which concludes with the statement: “On the whole the case does not appear to be one to which the Department would be justified in intervening,” seems to render it unnecessary to further discuss the same here. Since the receipt of that report nothing further respecting Bernhard has been heard at the legation.
182. Jean Adam Brunner.
Born at Schorbach, in Alsace-Lorraine, January 21, 1861; emigrated September 18, 1878; naturalized March 28, 1884; returned to his native place in September, 1887. On the 17th of October following he was arrested at Schorbach in consequence of a sentence to a fine of 600 marks or forty days’ imprisonment, imposed for avoidance of military service by the penal chamber of the land court at Saargemünd, and was, in default of payment of the fine, conveyed to prison at the last named place. The attention of the legation was within a brief period called to this case by Brunner himself, by his father, his brother, a friend in the United States, and also by the Department of State, to whom his friends had applied for instructions in his behalf to this legation. Having, on October 19 received the first intimation of Brunner’s situation, the legation on the same day applied at Schorbach for the further necessary information in the case, received the same on the 24th of that month, and on the same date intervened with the foreign office in his behalf, submitting the facts in the case, inviting attention to the bona fide character of his emigration and naturalization, and to the circumstance that he had only returned to his native place on a visit, and asking that in the event of the facts being found upon investigation to be as represented [Page 657] he be released and the fine remitted. The evidence of Brunner’s American citizenship was transmitted to the foreign office with the note of intervention. On November 24, following, Brunner reported to the legation his release on the 20th of that month. It is remarked in this connection that he might have secured the same at any time by the payment, under protest, of the amount of the fine imposed, the recovery of which for him by the legation would have caused no greater difficulty than the obtaining of his release. Referring to the instruction No. 259, of October 28, 1887, of the, Department relative to the case, the legation, with dispatch No. 542, of November 27, following, reported proceedings therein and Brunner’s release. On the 9th of December following, a note, dated the 8th of that month, was received from the foreign office in reply to the note of intervention confirming the statement received from Brunner of his release, and further informing the legation that the remainder of the punishment adjudged and the costs in the case would be remitted. This intelligence was at once communicated to Brunner, and with dispatch No. 548 of December 12, 1887, to the Department of State, which, with instruction No. 278, of the 31st of that month, expressed gratification with the result reached. Brunner returned to the United States shortly after his release. As illustrating the amount of labor caused by such cases in some instances it is remarked that twenty-four communications relating thereto were exchanged by the legation with its correspondents in the course of the proceedings.
183. Andrew Byczik.
Born at Rosko, Prussia, November 13, 1866; emigrated to the United States in November, 1881; naturalized January 30, 1888. On January 13, 1888, the legation received a communication from Byczik, dated the 26th of the preceding month, written from the United States relative to his case, and having on the same day written him for the further necessary facts and papers, received the same on the 6th of February following, with a letter dated the 2d of March preceding. On the same day the legation intervened with the foreign office in Byczik’s behalf, inclosing with its communication the evidence of his American nationality, and asking that an attachment to secure a fine imposed for avoidance of military duty by a court at Czarnikow be removed from an inheritance accruing to him from his father, the essential facts as above stated being upon investigation found to be true. On the same day the legation informed Byczik that intervention had been made in his behalf. In an answering note, dated the 23d of April, the foreign office informed the legation that no penal proceedings of the character referred to had been taken against Byczik, and no attachment laid on his inheritance, and that the mistake had probably arisen owing to an attachment having been imposed upon similar grounds on an inheritance accruing to his brother. On the day of the receipt of this note the legation communicated the intelligence it conveyed to Byczik, who has not since been heard from.
184. George Nielsen.
Born at Stubbak, Schleswig-Holstein, February 20, 1862; emigrated to the United States April 4, 1881; naturalized September 23, 1887; returned to his native place about the end of November following. This case was brought to the attention of the legation by instruction from the Department of State No. 296, of March 15, 1888, upon the receipt of which the legation intervened in behalf of Nielsen with the foreign office, presenting the facts and his complaint, which was that within about a week after his arrival on a visit to his old home he was arrested, taken before a court, detained in custody for an hour and a half, told he must pay a fine of 160 marks, the grounds therefor not being stated, further informed that he would have to serve in the German army, and his citizen paper and American passport taken from him. Being then allowed to go to his home, he left the country on the following night and returned to the United States without having regained his papers.
The legation requested the foreign office to cause the judgment, imposed presumably for violation of military duty, to be removed, his papers to be returned to him, and all proceedings against him to be desisted from, if the facts should, upon investigation, be found to be as stated. In an answering note from the foreign office dated August 16, following, and received on the 18th of that month, the legation was informed that the judgment of the 13th of May, 1886, imposing on Nielsen a fine of 160 marks for violation of military duty had been remitted, and the collection of the judicial costs incurred desisted from, and further, that Nielsen’s papers had on the 2d of January, 1888, been handed to his father for return to the son.
185. Julius Diamond.
Born about the year 1843, at Wreschen, Prussia, presumably; emigrated thence in 1857, at the age of fourteen years, to the United States; naturalized (?) In a communication dated June 6, 1888, received on the following day, Diamond presented to [Page 658] the legation the facts in the case, which were immediately communicated to the foreign office, and were as follows: He returned to Wreschen on a visit about the 1st of June, and was at once requested to identify himself before the burgomaster, which he did, leaving with that official his citizen papers. On the 5th of that month he was again called before that officer, who returned to him his papers, but at the same time handed him an order from the “Landrath” requiring him to leave Prussia within eight days. Immediately thereafter Diamond called on the official who had issued the order complained of, and urged the withdrawal of the same, informing him at the same time that he had always conducted himself peaceably; that he was not engaged in any business in this country, but had simply returned to it on a visit to his family and friends; that he intended to remain here but a short time, and that he knew of no reason why such order had been served on him. His request was, however, not complied with, although his American citizenship was acknowledged. In view of these circumstances the legation expressed its confident hope that, the facts being found upon investigation to be as stated, the foreign office would cause the order of expulsion to be withdrawn, and the proceedings taken against Diamond to be suspended by telegraph or otherwise pending such investigation. Diamond’s American passport was inclosed, with the statement that his certificate of naturalization was understood to be at Wreschen, and that, to its regret, the legation had not, owing to the urgency of the case, been able to present as full a statement of the facts as it could desire. On the same day the legation informed Diamond of the action taken in his behalf, and also reported the case to the Department of State with dispatch No. 623, of June 7, 1888. With instruction No. 331, of June 27, 1888, the Department expressed its satisfaction with the action taken by the legation in Diamond’s behalf. After some further correspondence between the legation and Diamond relative to his case, from which it appeared that he was being subjected to no further molestation, the foreign office, in an answering communication, dated June 15 and received on the 17th of that month, informed the legation that it was considered admissible to permit to Diamond a further sojourn at Wreschen, and that the appropriate authorities had been instructed to desist for the present from carrying out the measure complained of. Diamond was at once informed of the favorable decision reached in his case, as was also the Department of State with dispatch No. 642, of July 18, 1888. With instruction No. 348 of August 6, 1888, received on the 18th of that month, the Department expressed its satisfaction with the decision reached in this case. On the occasion of a visit paid by Diamond to this city, he called at the legation to express his thanks for the measures taken in his behalf and his great gratification at the result attained. Nothing further has been heard from him, and if not at Wreschen still, he is presumed to have remained there as long as he found it convenient to do so.
186. Hermann Oertel.
Born at Burgstadt, Saxony, September 21, 1865; emigrated to the United States in April, 1882; naturalized December 29, 1887. The necessary information having been secured, after some correspondence with the consulate of the United States at Chemnitz, through which attention was called first to the case, the legation, on the 3d of July, 1888, intervened in Oertel’s behalf, communicating to the foreign office, in addition to the above-mentioned facts, the following statements and complaints: On the 10th of June, 1888, Oertel returned to Germany to visit his parents residing near Chemnitz, with the intention of returning to the United States in about a month. On July 2, following, a court at Chemnitz condemned him to pay a fine of 150 marks or suffer imprisonment for the period of thirty days for alleged violation of military duty. The local authorities had since informed Oertel that he might expect to be arrested and imprisoned at any moment in default of payment of the fine, although he had protested against the course taken against him both before and since his condemnation referred to, appealing for immunity from the punishment adjudged to his rights as an American citizen, and submitting the evidence of such citizenship. The legation inclosed Oertel’s certificate of naturalization and asked that the case be investigated and the fine canceled, if the essential facts should be found to be as stated, and that, in view of the urgency of the case, Oertel being liable to be arrested and imprisoned at any moment, telegraphic instructions might be considerately sent to the local authorities at Chemnitz, directing the suspension of proceedings against him pending the investigation. The legation on the same day informed Oertel through the consulate at Chemnitz that intervention had been made in his behalf. In an answering note, dated July 28, and received on the 30th of that month, the foreign office informed the legation that the appropriate local authorities had been instructed to desist from the collection of the fine and costs imposed. Oertel, who had in the meantime been subjected to no further annoyance, was on the same day informed by the legation of this favorable decision, as was also, with dispatch No. 647, the Department of State, which thereafter, with instruction No. 354, of August 14, 1888, expressed its satisfaction with the result reached in the case.
[Page 659]187. August Klein.
Born at Kaiserslautern, Bavaria, December 27, 1862; emigrated to the United States about the year 1870; naturalized October 10, 1884. The attention of the legation was called to this case by the American consul-general at Frankfort-on-the-Main on July 4, 1888.
On the same day the legation applied to him for the necessary facts, which were supplied on the 12th of that month, when the legation intervened with the foreign office in Klein’s behalf, inclosing his certificate of naturalization, and submitting his further statements and complaint, which were as follows: On the 29th of May, 1888, Klein came to his native place on a brief visit intending to return to the United States about the 15th of July following. On the 29th of the preceding month he was arrested by the authorities at Kaiserslautern, and notwithstanding his appeal to his treaty-rights as a citizen of the United States, and the submission of the evidence of such citizenship, compelled to pay a fine of 300 marks for avoidance of military duty, adjudged by the land-court at that place. As the facts submitted showed clearly the bona fide character of the emigration and naturalization of Klein, the legation expressed the hope that the fine would be remitted, and the amount paid returned to Klein as speedily as possible as he needed it to defray the expenses of his return to America, which he must otherwise defer, to his great inconvenience. The legation on the same day notified Klein that it had intervened in his behalf. In an answering note, dated the 20th and received on the 21st of August following, the foreign office informed the legation that instructions had been given to the local authorities to desist from collecting the amount of the fine and costs in the case, adding that Klein’s statements to the legation were inaccurate, the fine having been judicially adjudged before his return from America. That, while he had been arrested, he had been immediately discharged after proving his American citizenship. Nor had he been compelled to pay the fine of 300 marks. The amount, since returned to them, had been voluntarily deposited with the authorities by his relatives in the Palatinate as security for the fine. On the same day the legation notified Klein through the consulate-general at Frankfort-on-the-Main of the result reached, and called his attention to the inaccuracy of his statements to the legation. Under date of 23d of that month the consul-general at Frankfort-on-the-Main informed the legation that its notification had been forwarded to Klein, who had in the meantime returned to the United States.
188. John Goldschmidt.
(Case
of fine unfinished.)
189. Henry (Hans) F. Jessen.
Born at Tyrstrup, Schleswig-Holstein, September 19, 1863; emigrated to the United States in August, 1880; naturalized October 21, 1885. The above facts and the further statements and complaint submitted by Jessen on the occasion of a personal call on August 15, 1888, and on the same day presented, together with the evidence of his American citizenship, to the foreign office, by the legation, were as follows: Jessen returned on the 27th of June, 1888, to his native country to make a brief visit to his parents at Tagkjer, in North Schleswig. He at once notified the local authorities of his arrival and of the purpose of his visit, presenting to them at the same time the evidence of his American citizenship, which was, he subsequently learned, transmitted to the Royal Government at Schleswig. Within two weeks from the time of his arrival lie was ordered to leave Schleswig-Holstein within twenty-four hours, no cause being assigned for such action. With this order he immediately complied, and now requests permission to return to Tagkjer for the brief period of from one to two weeks, in order that be may see his parents once more before his return, early in September next, to the United States. Jessen declares that he has by his personal demeanor given no cause of offense to the authorities of his native country. In view of these circumstances, of the great distance he has come to visit his parents, it is hoped that his request will not be refused, if upon investigation the essential facts are found to be as stated. As the granting of the permission sought would, in view of Jessen’s early return to the United States, prove illusory unless soon granted, the legation requested that it might at an early day be informed of the result of his application. With dispatch No. 659, of August 20, 1888, the legation reported to the Department of State its action taken in behalf of Jessen. Under date of September 7 following, Jessen informed the legation that he was back at Tagkjer with his parents, the authorities having granted him an extension of sojourn in accordance with his wish. He thanked the legation warmly for its successful action in his behalf. On the 19th of that month, in an answering note, dated the preceding day, the foreign office confirmed this intelligence, which was communicated to the Department by the legation with dispatch No. 666, of September 19, 1888, and also to Jessen who renewed his thanks to the legation.