No. 795.
Mr. Bayard
to Mr. Bragg.
Department
of State,
Washington, June 7,
1888.
No. 64.]Sir: I transmit, for your information, a copy of a
dispatch from the consul at Piedras Negras, No. 71, of the 18th ultimo,
relative to the imprisonment of B. B. Glasier, an American citizen at that
place, charged by the International Huntingdon Railway Company with
misappropriating funds, and the arbitrary interruption of an interview
between the accused and the consul, Mr. Allen, by Raphael Herara, first
local judge; also a copy of a dispatch from the consul-general at Matamoros,
No. 496, of the 26th ultimo, commenting in an able and impartial manner upon
this case, and the incident reported by Mr. Allen growing out thereof.
As a matter of international law recognized by the United States in its
dealings with Mexicans, and by all European Governments in their dealings
with foreigners, an alien, when under arrest or imprisonment for crime, is
entitled to consult, as to his further detention, with the consul or
diplomatic representative of the Government to which he is subject. This
principle lies at the basis of international law. That law assumes that the
sovereign of each civilized state recognizes aliens sojourning in his
territory as retaining the right to appeal for protection to the sovereign
of their allegiance. But this right can not be exercised unless such aliens
have free intercourse with the local consular or diplomatic representative
of that sovereign.
This privilege, moreover, is fully consistent with the Mexican code, as cited
and commented upon by Mr. Sutton in his dispatch, to which reference is
made.
You are therefore instructed to bring this matter to the notice of the
Mexican Government, with an expression of the assurance felt by this
Department that that Government will cause the error in this case to be
corrected, and will give instructions that in all future cases American
consuls or diplomatic representatives, as the case may be, shall have access
to American citizens when detained in Mexican prisons for trial, or when
preparing for such trial, or when desiring advice as to an appeal to a
superior court or to executive clemency.
I am, etc.,
[Inclosure 1 in No. 64.]
Mr. Allen to Mr.
Rives.
United
States Consulate,
Piedras Negras,
Mexico, May 18,
1888.
No. 71.]Sir: On Sunday morn, May 13 instant, I received
from B. B. Glasier a communication stating that he had been arrested and
was now in jail in this city, and requesting that I should call and have
a talk with him. I thereupon called upon the political judge, who seems
to enjoy general supervisory functions, and requested that he would
issue an order to the authorities of the jail which would enable me to
see the prisoner Glasier. This he promised to do. A few moments later,
accompanied by the mayor of Piedras Negras, I called on Raphael Herara,
first local judge. The prisoner was then brought in and I had not
conversed with him to exceed five minutes when Herara informed me that I
had no right to converse with the prisoner. I informed him that I had
the authority of the political judge. He then ordered the prisoner
removed
[Page 1204]
from the room, which
was promptly done. I then retired, and a few moments thereafter Judge
Herara issued instructions to the effect that the prisoner Glasier could
be seen by any one except the American consul.
During the same afternoon an ex parte examination
was held, at which the accusers with their counsel and interpreters were
present, while the accused was unrepresented by either counsel or
interpreter.
Last evening I received a letter from Glasier, and this morning still
another, urging upon me that his case should be promptly tried. On the
receipt of the third letter from Glasier, I called on the federal judge
of this district and explained the case to him fully, and also called
his attention to the official discourtesy which Judge Herara had shown
me. After a lengthy and somewhat animated discussion, he promised to
have the case brought up before him on review, and would advise me of
the result of his investigation. The judge also informed me that under
Mexican law an alien could not elect to have his cause tried before a
federal court. This is to be much regretted, as in the large majority of
cases the greed and rapacity of state and local officials prevent the
speedy adjudication of cases coming up before their respective
courts.
The issuance of such an order as that referred to by Judge Herara is well
calculated to impair if not to destroy the usefulness of a consul of the
United States on the Mexican frontier.
The charge against Glasier is misappropriating the sum of over $100, said
charge being brought by the Mexican International Railroad Company.
In my conversation with the federal judge above referred to, I explicitly
told the judge that I appeared only in my official capacity, and all
that I asked was that the accused might receive a prompt and impartial
trial.
The early determination of the duty of consuls of the United States in
Mexico under similar circumstances is much to be desired, and I
respectfully, though earnestly, commend the matter to the attention of
the Department.
I am, etc.,
[Inclosure 2 in No. 64.]
Mr. Sutton to Mr.
Rives.
Consulate-General of United States of America,
Matamoros, May 25, 1888.
No. 496.]Sir: I forward by this mail dispatch No. 71, of
the 18th instant, from Consul Allen, of Piedras Negras, as to the case
of the American B. B. Glasier, now in jail there, charged by the
International Huntingdon Railway Company with misappropriating
funds.
Consul Allen entitles his dispatch “official discourtesy” and gives the
details of his interview with Glasier in Judge Herara’s presence and the
abrupt termination thereof by the latter. He also states that the judge
gave orders that Glasier could be seen by anyone except the American
consul.
By Mexican law any person arrested for serious offenses is held
“incomunicado” for the first three days, a sort of grand jury indictment
period. During this time no person may communicate with the prisoner
except by permission of the judge. I presume it was during this
preliminary detention period that the trouble occurred. But by Mexican
law and the commentaries of their best writers this incommunication is
for the express and sole purpose of furthering the ends of justice, and
no judge has a right to refuse to allow the prisoner to see or
communicate with his friends unless there be suspicion that such a
course will tend to defeat the ways of justice. Mexican judges are given
large discretion on this point, but they are also held strictly
responsible for any abuse of this discretion. Unless Consul Allen or
Glasier violated the proprieties there could have been no just cause for
breaking up the interview nor for the issuance of such an order as
Consul Allen alleges.
All the above is by the laws of Coahuila, under which the prisoner is
held. As we have no treaty privileges with Mexico which apply in the
present case, I refer you to the foreign code by Aspíroz, the recognized
authority on this subject in Mexico.
By article 473 of his compilation foreign consuls may address the judge
in any criminal cause in which their countrymen are accused, and they
have ample privilege to take such information (subject to the laws and
treaties in force) as they may think necessary to establish the truth as
well as the origin and foundation of the charges. This, as a matter of
course, would imply one or more interviews with the accused.
Unless, therefore, Consul Allen violated the courtesies of the judge’s
office, which I do not think at all likely, the breaking up of the
interview was an arbitrary act, unjust to the prisoner and highly
discourteous to Consul Allen.
[Page 1205]
I beg to request that this action of the judge be notified to the Mexican
Government.
It would also be of much benefit to the efficiency and dignity of the
consular service here if the Mexican Government would issue instructions
based on the laws of the country giving this privilege of communicating
with prisoners except when, for a good reason, it was suspected that a
consul was aiding to defeat the ends of justice.
Of course any man fit to be a consul is above the suspicion of such
action, and the privilege properly used could only be productive of good
results. It gives the average American a very strange sensation to be
shut up in a Mexican jail, and fifteen minutes’ talk with his consul, if
only to have the law explained and see that he has food and bedding, is
a great calmer of the nerves. I have had many interviews with Americans
in the prisons here, and never had my right questioned but once—some
years ago. When I read article 473 of the foreign code to him and
threatened an appeal by telegraph to Mexico the judge yielded the
point.
In fact, I have not usually asked permission, but have gone directly to
the jail and, on a polite request, the warden has always produced the
prisoner and given us a corner of the room in which to converse.
I am, etc.,
