Mr. Blaine to Mr.
Grant.
Department
of State,
Washington, October 8,
1889.
No. 25.]
Sir: I have to inclose herewith, under date of
August 17, 1889, copy of a petition presented to this Department by Hugo
Klamer, a naturalized citizen of the United States, born in Austria, who has
lately been expelled from that country.
This case forms the subject of the dispatches of your predecessor, Nos. 121
and 128, of the 2d of March and 13th of April last, respectively.
I also inclose for your information a copy of dispatch No. 301, of the 4th of
February last, from Mr. Jussen, consul-general of the United States at
Vienna, in relation to the same case.
It appears that Mr. Klamer was born in Vienna on the 12th of November, 1859,
and emigrated to the United States in October, 1873, being then not quite
fourteen years of age. In his nineteenth year, being still a resident of the
city of New York, he received a citation to appear for examination as a
recruit for the Austrian army. Pursuant to this citation he presented
himself at the Austrian consulate in the city of New York, when he was
informed that if he intended to remain in the United States he should appear
before a notary public, and in the presence of two witnesses declare his
intention to become an American citizen. This Mr. Klamer did, and took the
document when completed to the Austrian consulate, and there also signed a
request to the Austrian Government, which was drawn up by the secretary of
the
[Page 28]
consulate, to have his name
crossed off the list of Austrian subjects liable to military duty. After
this Mr. Klamer heard no more of the subject of service in the Austrian
army.
On August 20, 1883, being then nearly twenty-four years of age, and having
resided in the United States for nearly ten years, he was naturalized as a
citizen of the United States.
In 1885, in consequence of the advanced age of his father, Mr. Klamer
returned to Austria and proceeded to Vienna. On the third day after his
arrival in that city he was called before a police commissioner and informed
that he was charged with being a fugitive from military service. This charge
appears to have been discontinued. Several months afterwards Mr. Klamer was
again called upon to appear before an officer of the military conscription
department, but upon exhibition of his certificate of naturalization he was
allowed to go. In 1887 his father died. Mr. Klamer and his brother, the only
male members of the family, then undertook the settlement of the business of
their deceased parent. In January, 1889, that task not having been
concluded, Klamer received from the imperial royal police directory a notice
of expulsion, which was to take effect on or before the 27th of that month.
Upon the intervention of Mr. Jussen the execution of this decree was
suspended, and the matter was brought to the attention of the legation,
whose correspondence with the Austrian Government you have in your
possession.
The grounds stated for the decree of expulsion are that Klamer had emigrated
to the United States for the sole purpose of evading military duty as an
Austrian subject, and that such conduct might give rise to public scandal;
and, notwithstanding the representations of the legation, the decree of
expulsion was finally executed.
This proceeding on the part of the Austrian Government appears to have been
in derogation of the rights to which Mr. Klamer as a naturalized citizen of
the United States of Austrian origin was entitled under the treaty of
September 20, 1870. By Article I of that treaty it is provided that—
Citizens of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy who have resided in the
United States of America uninterruptedly at least five years, and
during such residence have become naturalized citizens of the United
States, shall be held by the Government of Austria and Hungary to be
American citizens, and shall be treated as such.
The second article of the treaty provides that—
A naturalized citizen of the one party, on return to the territory of
the other party, remains liable to trial and punishment for an
action punishable by the laws of his original country, committed
before his emigration, saving always the limitation established by
the laws of his original country, and any other remission of
liability to punishment.
In regard, however, to prosecutions for the evasion of military service the
provisions of the article are explicit. The conditions under which a former
citizen of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy who is to be held as an American
citizen under the treaty is liable to trial and punishment according to the
laws of Austro-Hungary for nonfulfilment of military duty are especially
stated, as follows:
- First. If he has emigrated after having been drafted, at the time
of conscription, and thus having become enrolled as a recruit for
service in the standing army.
- Second. If he has emigrated whilst be stood in service under the
flag or had a leave of absence only for a limited time.
- Third. If, having a leave of absence for an unlimited time, or
belonging to the reserve or to the militia, he has emigrated after
having received a call into the service or after a public
proclamation requiring his appearance, or after war has broken out.
On the other hand, a former citizen of the Austro-Hungarian
Monarchy, naturalized in the United States, who, by or after his
emigration, has transgressed the legal provisions
[Page 29]
on military duty by any acts or
omissions other than those above enumerated in the clauses numbered
one, two, and three, can, on his return to his original country,
neither be held subsequently to military service nor remain liable
to trial and punishment for the nonfulfillment of his military
duty.
It is evident that Mr. Klamer had violated none of the provisions of Austrian
law relating to military service, as above defined, and consequently that by
the terms of the treaty he was exempt from liability to such
prosecution.
In view of this fact, and of all the circumstances of the case—his early
emigration to the United States, his long residence here, the object of his
return to Austria, and of his residence in that country—it seems to the
Department that neither the ground alleged for Mr. Klamer’s expulsion nor
the oppressive proceedings to which he was subjected were warranted by the
facts.
You are instructed to bring this subject to the attention of the imperial
royal ministry for foreign affairs in the sense of this instruction.
I am, etc.,
[Inclosure 1 in No. 25.]
Mr. Klamer to Mr.
Blaine.
39. Fourth Place,
Brooklyn, N. Y., August 17, 1889.
Honorable Sir: In the following lines I beg
leave to bring to your notice in concise form a case of flagrant
violation of the rights of an American citizen, and also a violation of
the treaty between Austria and the United States of America:
Born in Vienna, Austria, on the 12th of November, 1859, I emigrated to
the United States in October, 1873, landing in New York, New York State,
being at the time barely fourteen years of age, having an Austrian
passport of three years duration. When nineteen years of age I appeared
at the Austrian consulate of New York, having been cited there by an
order to be examined as to my bodily ability to be enlisted into the
Austrian army.
I thereupon asked the only person present there at the time what was to
be done. Mr. Meyer, the secretary of the Austrian consulate, told me I
should appear before a notary public and in the presence of two
witnesses declare my intention to become an American citizen. This done,
I brought him the document, and after having signed a request to the
Austrian Government, drawn up by Mr. Meyer, asking the aforesaid
Government to cross my name off the list of citizens Austrian born, and
as a consequence from the military list, he told me that he would
forward the two documents to the competent Austrian authorities, and
that nothing more was necessary. And while in the United States I never
again was notified from the Austrian consulate to appear before it. I
then passed my examination at the New York College of Pharmacy, well
knowing that I could not practice pharmacy in Austria with an American
diploma; but since I never intended to go back it made no difference to
me.
In 1885 my father, then seventy-eight years of age, called me back, he no
longer feeling able to attend to his business of a cotton goods
manufacturer, a business which was the support of the family, and,
feeling his end draw near, wanted to settle up his affairs, and insisted
on my return to help him. In consequence I sailed in October, 1885, and
really found plenty to do. On the third day after my arrival I was
called before a police commissioner and was told I was wanted as a
military fugitive, and on my asking was told that the Government had
refused to cross me off their list as a citizen born in Austria, and
therefore my name was carried forward year by year as a fugitive from my
military duty. I then went to Mr. Jussen, the consul-general in Vienna
at the time, and he placed me under his protection. I told this
gentleman that I was able to swear that I was never notified of this
refusal of the Austrian Government, or else I should certainly have
undertaken the proper steps to save me the humiliation that was in store
for me.
After the lapse of some months I had to appear before an officer of the
military conscription department, but, after showing my citizen paper,
dated the 20th of August, 1883, superior court of New York, I was again
allowed to go. I intended to go back to New York in the spring of 1888,
and accordingly went to the legation of the United States and procured a
passport, signed A, R. Lawton and dated the 16th
[Page 30]
of February, 1888, and to obtain this I swore that
in all probability I should sail during the spring of that year.
My aged father died eighty years of age on the 17th day of December,
1887. The only male members of the family, my brother and myself, then
took charge of the business under the old name of the Arm, but according
to Austrian law we had to register our own names, on account of the
business taxes. We thought we could arrange the inheritance among
ourselves, being my mother, two sisters, my brother and myself, all
being of age, but it transpired that father had in his will given the
part of my oldest sister to her children, and, in consequence, there
were minors in the transaction, and the court took the whole affair into
hand. I therefore could not leave, but had to wait until the court
should have divided the inheritance. But 1888 went by, and in the spring
of 1889 the court had not arranged yet. In April, 1889, I was again
called before an officer of the city council of Vienna, and after taking
down a protocol wherein I stated all the foregoing, I could go. But a
few days after, I got notice from the president of the police of Vienna
to leave the city within forty-eight hours. I thereupon went again to
Mr. Jussen, who protested against the expulsion, claiming a violation of
the treaty.
The grounds and reasons handed down to the police from the department of
the interior upon which I was to be expelled, were:
“It being evident that the said Hugo Klamer having emigrated to the
United States with the sole purpose to evade his military duty as an
Austrian citizen, and furthermore, since this might give rise to public
scandal, he is, therefore, for all time to come, expelled from
Austria.”
The order of expulsion only says that I am expelled forever, because I am
found to be a person “endangering public order.”
Now, I was never arrested, was highly respected by everybody, and never
talked about my American citizenship, much less bragged about it. Mr.
Edmund Jussen claimed that a man like myself, having so much of the most
vital importance at stake, and having to conduct the business, the
largest portion of the wealth and means to live for the whole bereaved
family, was under the circumstances ninety-nine times out of a hundred,
compelled under such a pressure, to renounce his American citizenship
and become again an Austrian.
But, I think it is Article VIII of the treaty says: “That no attempt
shall be made by either party to bring or force a citizen of the other
part upon his return to his native country to renounce the acquired
citizenship.” The endeavors of Mr. Edmund Jussen, consul-general, and
Mr. A. E. Lawton, minister plenipotentiary, but more particularly those
of my lawyer, Mr. Johann Letschke, of Vienna, only had the effect to
postpone my expulsion up to the 1st of September, 1889. So I am expelled
from Austria forever like a criminal, and that for no just reason.
I hope to have convinced your honor that the reasons for my expulsion can
not be called reasons at all.
I have at the present time no business interest in Austria, having sold
out to my brother, and intend to live in the United States; but my
mother living, I might at some time again have to look to my interests,
and could not go on account of being expelled.
There are plenty of Austrians that are not citizens, doing business and
making money here without ever being molested; then why should an
American citizen that has been in this country since his early youth not
go over to Austria on a visit, when Austrians as before said live and do
business in the United States, and then go back and enjoy their gain in
Austria? I am not envious of them, but why should there not be equal
right on both sides?
I hope your honor will take notice of this, my appeal to you, to take the
shame of being expelled like a criminal from me as an American,
law-abiding, and orderly citizen, and give me the hope that I might at
least have the right to go over there again when my duties to my mother
or my interests demand it.
Hoping to receive your esteemed reply, I take the liberty to annex my
address, and beg to remain,
Yours, very respectfully,
[Inclosure 2 in No. 25.]
Mr. Jussen to Mr.
Rives.
United
States Consulate-General,
Vienna, February 4,
1889.
No. 301.]
Sir: I have the honor to report that on the
18th day of January ultimo Mr. Hugo Klamer, a naturalized American
citizen, applied to this consulate-general for protection against a
decree of expulsion issued against him by the imperial royal police
directory of this city.
[Page 31]
All the facts in the case, as well as the argument upon which the
official protest of this consulate-general was based, will appear
sufficiently and clearly from the several inclosures herewith
respectfully transmitted.
The time originally fixed for carrying the decree of expulsion into
effect expired on January 27th ultimo, and no reply having been received
up to the 23d of January from the imperial royal police directory by
this consulate-general, I considered it my duty under the regulations to
submit all the papers in the case to the United States legation for
further action. Since that date I have been favored with an answer from
the police directory, from which it appears that an appeal has been
taken by Mr. Klamer to the municipal government, and that the original
decree, together with my protest has been referred to this tribunal for
final decision. Up to this date no definite action has been taken by the
city authorities, but I understand that the United States legation has
presented the case, together with a copy of the protest, to the imperial
royal ministry of foreign affairs. To what extent and purpose the
ministry of foreign affairs may influence and control the final decision
of the municipal government remains to be seen. Whatever action,
however, may be taken in the premises, there can be no doubt that such
action will be dependent on the sanction of the ministry of foreign
affairs, and a definite construction of the treaty applicable to this
case will thus be obtained from the highest authority in the empire.
I trust the Department will approve of the spirit and tenor of my
protest, and will concur in the view that it is highly desirable that a
clear understanding should be arrived at with reference to the
construction of the treaty in question, so that our Government may be
fully advised as to the treatment to be expected by naturalized American
citizens of Austrian descent when temporarily visiting their old
home.
I have, etc.,
[Inclosure 3 in No.
25.—Translation.]
Mr. Jussen to the
imperial royal police
directory.
United
States Consulate-General,
Vienna, January 18,
1889.
No. 4122.]
The Consulate-General of the United States of America begs leave to
inform the honorable police directory that Mr. Hugo Klamer, a
naturalized American citizen, has this day claimed the protection of his
Government against the decree of expulsion issued against him by the
honorable imperial royal police directory, a true copy of which decree
is hereunto annexed.
Mr. Klamer has exhibited his American passport and his certificate of
naturalization to this consulate-general, and the said documents were
found to be genuine and valid in law. According to his statement, the
truth of which, as I am informed, is not questioned by the honorable
police directory, Hugo Klamer was born in Vienna in 1859, and emigrated
in the year 1873, when he was in his fourteenth year, to the United
States of America. The superior court of New York issued his certificate
of naturalization on the 20th day of August, 1883, and he returned to
Vienna, in the year 1885 for the purpose of visiting his father and of
remaining here for a limited time.
His father died in 1887, and his death was the direct cause of the
prolongation of Hugo Klamer’s sojourn in Vienna. He foresaw that the
settlement of his father’s estate would require considerable time, and
as he desired to fortify himself against all possible question as to his
rights as an American citizen, he made the required application for a
passport at the office of the United States legation in Vienna, and his
passport was duly issued to him on the 16th day of February, 1888, after
Mr. Klamer had affirmed in writing, under oath, that he intended to
return to the United States of America, to fulfill his duties of an
American citizen, as soon as his business in Vienna was arranged. Mr.
Klamer now states with positive certainty that he expects to be able to
return to the United States in the month of August of the current
year.
It appears from the annexed decree of expulsion, and Mr. Klamer has been
moreover officially informed, that the expulsion has been decreed in
accordance with the provisions of the penal code of the year 1852
(paragraph 323), and that the imperial royal authorities regard Klamer
as a fugitive, who emigrated to America for the sole purpose of avoiding
military service, and who became an American citizen without first
having obtained the consent of the imperial royal government.
According to the provisions of the treaty concluded between
Austria-Hungary and the United States of America the reasoning upon
which the expulsion is based does not seem tenable. The consent of the
imperial royal government is only required in case the Austrian subject
is held to military duty at the time of his
emigration, in accordance with Article II of the treaty. But
Hugo Klamer, emigrating as a boy at
[Page 32]
the age of fourteen years, was not subject to
military duty, and can, therefore, according to the express language of
said Article II, not be held to punishment for non-fulfilment of that
duty, not even then, if it was proven that he emigrated for the purpose
of evading military service in the future because
Article II provides that the Austrian emigrant, naturalized in the
United States, can, on his return, be held liable to punishment only if
at the time of his emigration he was either a recruit enrolled for
service, or stood under the flag, or belonged to the reserve or the
militia, after a a public proclamation requiring his appearance had been
issued, or after war had broken out.
Moreover, the assertion is hardly maintainable that a boy who emigrates
at the age of fourteen years, who resides twelve years uninterruptedly
in the United States and acquires American citizenship during his
residence there, and then returns to his old home for the purpose of a
visit, and is compelled by circumstances to prolong his visit, but
declares under oath that he intends to return to the United States at an
early day, has emigrated for the purpose of evading military
service.
All the facts contradict this assertion and disprove the reasons advanced
for issuing the decree of expulsion.
Nevertheless, Hugo Klamer, who has the undoubted right to be treated as
an American citizen, is now to be held liable to punishment by the
Imperial Royal Government because he failed to fulfill a condition which
is not recognized in the treaty. Ho is to be expelled because he did not
obtain the consent of the Government to his emigration, although such
consent was not required in his case. He is to be punished because, it
is alleged, he emigrated to avoid military service, although the facts
prove that be emigrated to make the United States his permanent home,
and although such punishment is not admissible under Article II.
As a consequence of this argument the great majority of all naturalized
American citizens of Austrian descent might expect immediate expulsion
on visiting their old home.
This consulate-general also respectfully begs leave to call attention to
Article IV of the treaty in question, which provides:
“The emigrant from the one state who, according to Article I, is to be
held as a citizen of the other state, shall not, on his return to his
original country, be constrained to resume his former citizenship, yet
if he shall of his own accord re-acquire it, and renounce the
citizenship obtained by naturalization, such a renunciation is
allowable, and no fixed period of residence shall be required for the
recognition of his recovery of citizenship in his original country.”
The return therefore of the Austrian emigrant after his naturalization in
the United States seems to be provided for and his right thereto
guarantied. The inevitable and logical consequences of the privileges
granted in this article are that the Austrian naturalized in the United
States may return to the country of his nativity without being either
directly or indirectly compelled to resume his former citizenship, and
that he is entitled to a temporary sojourn in Austria.
The threat of expulsion, however, is equivalent to a compulsory measure
and may make it expedient for the Austro-American citizen temporarily
sojourning hero for the purposes of business to resume his former
citizenship as the only refuge against expulsion.
For these reasons and in view of the provisions of the treaty heretofore
cited this consulate-general believes it to be its duty to protest
against the expulsion of Hugo Klamer.
Aside, however, from the reasons stated, other causes exist which argue
against the expediency of the enforcement of so draconic a measure by
the imperial royal authorities.
In the United States and especially in the port of New York reside
hundreds of Austrian subjects who have, for a long series of years, been
engaged in the importation of Austrian merchandise and have never
harbored the intention to acquire American citizenship. These Austrians
have in course of time increased the export of Austrian manufactures to
the United States to the sum of 25,000,000 florins per annum. They are
very successful competitors of the American importer as well as
manufacturer, and monopolize almost completely the trade in Vienna
specialties. Most of these gentlemen return to their old home to enjoy
their fortune after they have amassed it in the United States. These
foreigners are of no particular benefit to the United States; on the
contrary, they impair the business interests of the American importer
and manufacturer.
In view of these facts the question arises in what manner the action of
the American authorities would be judged here in Austria, in case they
should suddenly expel these foreign importers from the country and thus
injure the export trade of Austria and especially that of the city of
Vienna. And yet such action would only be in the nature of a retaliatory
measure if the proposed expulsion of Hugo Klamer is carried out.
My Government has always made the most liberal concessions to foreigners,
Even
[Page 33]
during the civil war, when
a general conscription was ordered, the United States did not disturb
the foreigners, although many of them, Austrians included, were
transacting lucrative business, and were exempt from military duty,
while the American stood in the field under arms and protected the
persons remaining at home in their possessions.
An expulsion was not even thought of in those agitated times and much
less carried out. How long these liberal and extremely humane views will
prevail if expulsion of American citizens like the one in question is
decreed here can not be predicted.
After submitting these facts and considerations, this consulate-general
respectfully requests the honorable imperial royal police directory to
answer this communication at its earliest convenience, and to inform the
undersigned whether the honorable police directory is disposed to
rescind the said decree of expulsion, or whether it affirms its
decision. In the latter case the duty would devolve upon the
consulate-general to submit the question, together with the
correspondence relating thereto, to the United States legation at
Vienna, for the purpose of obtaining a final decision on the part of the
imperial royal ministry of foreign affairs, and thus giving my
Government positive and final information with reference to the
treatment which naturalized American citizens of Austrian descent may
expect on the part of the Imperial Royal Government.
Inasmuch as the expulsion of Hugo Klamer is ordered for the 27th instant,
this consulate-general begs to be favored with an answer by the 23d
instant. If no answer should be received up to that date this
consulate-general will be in duty bound to report the case at once to
the United States legation, so that the question may be submitted to the
Austro-Hungarian ministry of foreign affairs before the time fixed for
expulsion expires.
With the assurance, etc.,
[Inclosure 4 in No.
25.—Translation.]
Decree.
The imperial royal police directory hereby issues the following decree,
granting the right of appeal, upon the basis of the law of July 27,
1871, R. G. Bl. 88, paragraphs 1, 2, and 5:
Hugo Klamer is hereby, in accordance with the provisions of the penal
code of the year 1852 [paragraph 323], permanently expelled from all the
kingdoms and countries represented in the Diet (Reichsrath), and this
from considerations of the public order, arid on the ground of the
provisions of paragraph 2, chapter 5, of the law of July 27, 1871, R. G.
Bl. 88.
Krauss, M.
P.
Vienna, January 15,
1889.
This is a correct copy.
[
seal.]
L. Wahber.
Vienna, January 15,
1889.
[Inclosure 5 in No.
25.—Extract.]
Mr. Jussen to Mr.
Lawton.
United
States Consulate-General,
Vienna, January 24,
1889.
Sir: In pursuance of consular regulations I
have the honor to transmit herewith a copy of the protest addressed by
this consulate-general to the imperial royal police directory of Vienna
in re Hugo Klamer, together with a
translation of the same.
The facts upon which the protest is based appear, I think, sufficiently
clear upon the face of the protest.
I desire to state that I am fully aware of the inherent power vested in
all governments to expel foreigners from their respective domains
without any cause or provocation whatever, and that I am also informed
as to the exceptional extent of power granted and exercised by the
police authorities of this Empire. But in the case under consideration
the expulsion is based upon a penal law, and the American citizen to be
expelled has been officially notified that he is regarded as a fugitive
from military service and to be punished as such. Against this position,
and against this untenable basis of the draconic measure proposed, I
believed it my official duty to protest.
In my protest I had asked the favor of an answer by the 23d instant,
because the time fixed for expulsion expires, according to official
notice served on Mr. Klamer,
[Page 34]
on
the 27th instant. The honorable police directory has not seen fit to
comply with my request, and having failed to obtain the desired redress
from the local authorities I now beg leave to submit the whole question
to you for the purpose of obtaining a final decision at the hands of the
imperial royal ministry of foreign affairs. Inasmuch as it is not to be
expected that the ministry of foreign affairs will render a final
decision by the 27th instant, I would most respectfully suggest that a
temporary stay of proceedings be applied for, in order to forestall the
probability that Mr. Klamer be transported across the lines as a quasi
criminal while his rights as an American citizen are held under
consideration by the imperial royal minister of foreign affairs.
I am, etc.,
[Inclosure 6 in No. 25.]
Mr. Jussen to Mr.
Lawton.
United
States Consulate-General,
Vienna, January 24,
1889.
Sir: In my letter of this date, inclosing my
protest in the case of Hugo Klamer, I omitted to call your attention to
the fact that the proposed expulsion is permanent for
all time to come, so that, if the decree is affirmed, Mr.
Klamer can never again visit his old home, no matter what the exigencies
of his business or his family relations may require.
The decree could not possibly be more sweeping and cruel unless
confiscation of the property inherited from his father was added to the
expulsion.
I think the proceeding is unusually harsh and certainly calls for an
energetic protest.
I am, etc.,
[Inclosure 7 in No.
25.—Translation.]
Mr. Krauss to Mr.
Jussen.
Vienna, January 22,
1889.
Sir: Referring to your esteemed communication
of the 18th instant, No. 4122, in regard to the expulsion decree issued
against the American citizen Hugo Klamer, under date of January 15
instant (No. 350), I beg leave to inform you that the said Klamer has,
under date of January 21 instant, appealed from this decree, of which he
was notified on January 18 instant.
The expulsion decree has, therefore, not as yet gone into effect, but
will, together with the documents thereto appertaining, and with the
motion for appeal annexed, be submitted to the honorable municipal
government (Statthalterei) as appellate tribunal
for competent decision.
The time for the eventual enforcement of the decree can, therefore, not
be fixed before this decision is rendered, and the belief that the 27th
of January instant was fixed for the carrying out of the decree, as
stated in your esteemed communication, is based upon a
misunderstanding.
I have forwarded your esteemed communication, together with the motion
for appeal, to the honorable municipal government (Statthalterei) for further action.
With the assurance, etc.,
[Inclosure 8 in No.
25.—Translation.]
Mr. Jussen to Mr.
Krauss.
United
States Consulate-General,
Vienna, January 26,
1889.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of your esteemed communication of the 22d instant, which was,
however, not delivered to me until to-day, and I respectfully beg leave
to inform the honorable imperial royal police directory that, in
pursuance of the provisions of consular regulations, I have already
transmitted a copy
[Page 35]
of the
protest entered by this consulate-general against the proposed expulsion
of Hugo Klamer to the United States legation, under date of the 24th
instant, because I was under the impression that the said protest had
been rejected by the honorable police directory, as I had not the honor
to be favored with an answer to the same by the 23d instant.
As regards the statement contained in the esteemed communication, namely,
“that the belief that the 27th day of January instant was fixed for the
carrying out of said decree was based upon a misunderstanding,” I
respectfully beg leave to say that Mr. Hugo Klamer informed this
consulate-general that at the time when said expulsion decree was served
upon him he was notified by the imperial royal police officer making
such service that said decree would be enforced on the 27th instant.
Inasmuch as this consulate-general regarded this verbal notice as
official, and as no date for the enforcement of the decree was noted
upon the face of this document, this consulate-general thought it proper
to be guided in its action by the verbal notice referred to.
With the assurance of my grateful appreciation of your esteemed
communication and of the explanation with reference to the mode of
procedure in the case under consideration,
I have, etc.,
