In addition to my note of September 18, I wrote and telegraphed to the late
prime minister (Trecoupi) urging the prompt release of Catechi, to which I
received no reply. The whole matter, so far as I can learn, was practically
handed over to the military council, whose conclusions were accepted without
further examination.
As soon as it was possible after the organization of the new Government I
presented the case most fully to the new minister of foreign affairs, M.
Deligeorges, and also to the prime minister, M. Deliyanni, who is minister
of war. With both these I have had protracted interviews, as well as with
the minister of finance, with whom I have long been on terms of personal
intimacy.
As is perhaps natural, the new cabinet has some hesitation in taking up a
question which was decided by its predecessor, although manifesting entire
willingness to discuss the merits of the case.
On the occasion of my last interview but one with the minister of foreign
affairs, when pressing upon his attention the facts of the case, with the
arguments based thereon and the Hellenic law as applied thereto, he
requested that I do him the kindness of restating the case and presenting
therewith the arguments I had advanced in urging the release of Catechi.
This statement I presented in person to-day, and after a protracted
interview left the minister under the impression that the decision of the
late Government will be overruled and Catechi released.
I desire, however, the instructions of the Department for guidance in the
event of the refusal to release Catechi.
[Inclosure 2 in No. 68.]
Mr. Snowden to Mr.
Deligeorges.
Legation of the United States,
Athens, November 26,
1890.
Sir: I cheerfully comply with your suggestion
for a restatement of the facts and arguments heretofore presented to the
late Government, and those which I have had the honor on several
occasions to submit to Your Excellency and to the prime minister, in
relation to the case of Emmanuel C. Catechi, a citizen of the United
States, conscripted and now held in the military service of Greece.
The facts in the case can be briefly stated. Emmanuel C. Catechi was born
in the island of Merlera, Corfu, on the 15th day of March, 1858, and
emigrated to the United States in 1872, when 14 years of age. After
residing therein for a period of about 7 years, he became, in accordance
with the laws, a naturalized citizen of the United States on the 16th
day of April, 1879, being then over 21 years of age. He continued to
reside in the United States until the year 1885, when he returned to
Corfu to visit his parents. On his arrival in Greece, bearing his
naturalization papers and a passport issued by the Department of State
at Washington, he was duly registered as a citizen at our consular
agency at Corfu.
Shortly after his return to Corfu he was conscripted for your military
service, but on the establishment of his claim to American citizenship
was promptly released. In 1886 he was again conscripted, his name not
having been removed from the conscription list. Again he was released on
the application of our consular agent at Corfu, who again established
his claim to foreign citizenship. To avoid future annoyance on this
score, and acting on the advice of the Numark of Corfu and United States
Consular Agent Woodley, he petitioned the court to have his name removed
from the conscription list. Judicial proceedings were had before your
courts, which resulted in the imposition of the minimum penalty in fine
and imprisonment allowed under your laws where a subject of Greece
changes his allegiance without permission of your Government. In
accordance with the decree of your court, he paid the fine and suffered
the imprisonment, and it was clearly understood his (Catechi’s) name
would be stricken from the list of those subject to military
conscription, and the United States consular agent at Corfu asserts that
his name was, in fact, removed from the original catalogue of his
district. Be that as it may, the fact remains that he was again
conscripted during the month of May last and forced into the military
service, where he still remains in spite of the most earnest
remonstrances on the part of the representative of my Government.
On the last conscription of Catechi, as on the two previous ones, the
United States consular agent at Corfu submitted to your authorities the
proof of his American citizenship, and in addition a copy of the
proceedings of your courts, through which Catechi had purged himself of
the only offense charged against him under your laws.
The local authorities, however, continued and still continue to hold
Catechi in military duress in disregard of his rights as an American
citizen, in disregard of the precedents established in his own case, and
of the fact that if he had committed an offense in changing his
allegiance without permission—a doctrine against which my Government is
ever disposed to expostulate—he had, by suffering the judicial penalty
imposed by your court, purged himself and stood before your law as if
permission to change his allegiance had been granted previous to his
becoming an American citizen.
On learning of the conscription of Catechi, although absent from your
capital on official duty elsewhere, I immediately addressed a
communication to your predecessor, setting forth the facts as
communicated to me, and on them requested the release of Catechi from
your military service. My communication was supplemented by one from the
United States consul at Patras, who in my absence, acting under direct
instructions from, my Government, presented in detail all the facts in
the case and upon them requested the release of Catechi. To my
communication of September 18, and to that of the United States consul
at Patras of October 6, no reply was received until there arrived by
mail at Patras on the 5th of November a communication from His
Excellency the late minister of foreign affairs, dated October 19.
[Page 518]
In his reply the late minister does not attempt to controvert any of the
facts or arguments advanced for the release of Catechi, hut contents
himself with saying that “according to existing laws in Greece the above
mentioned (Catechi) could not change his nationality before attaining
his majority and obtaining the authority of the Royal Government. All
naturalization obtained outside of these conditions could not absolve
him of the legal obligations he is under to Hellenic laws and
particularly toward the military service.”
I submit to your candid judgment whether this answer meets the case as
presented or is in harmony with the facts or with your own law as
applied to them by your highest legal tribunal having such cases in
charge.
The law requiring the royal assent to enable a Greek subject to change
his nationality, to which the late minister refers, inflicts a
punishment when that assent is not obtained. Is not the infliction of
this punishment a clear indication that your law recognizes that a Greek
subject may change his nationality without such assent? If this be not
the case the assumption of foreign allegiance by a Greek subject is a
nullity, requiring no attention from your Government.
It would seem, however, that the logical purpose of your law in
inflicting a penalty upon a Greek subject who fails to obtain the royal
assent to a transfer of allegiance is that when the legal punishment has
been inflicted, the penalty is exhausted and the person paying the same
placed before your law precisely in the position he would occupy if he
had received the royal assent before changing his allegiance. This is
the construction placed upon a similar law in France, and, if it is not
a fair interpretation of your law, I fail to recognize any logical force
in its provisions.
To hold, as in the case of Catechi, who has suffered the penalty imposed
by your law for his becoming an American citizen without your assent,
that, after suffering the penalty of his oversight or neglect, you can
still demand of him military service, as if his allegiance had never
been changed, appears most illogical.
If the change of allegiance on the part of a Greek subject affords to him
no immunity from your military or other service on his return to Greece,
why inflict punishment in addition to the service you demand of him?
Does it seem reasonable, or even possible, that your law can bear such a
construction? There is another fact bearing upon this point in the case,
and to which I beg to call your attention. I am informed from a reliable
source that, under your penal law, where a former subject has suffered
the penalty imposed for changing his nationality without the royal
assent, as in the case of Catechi, he thereby loses all the civil rights
enjoyed by subjects of Greece.
If this be true, upon what ground can military service be demanded where
civil sights are denied? A primary principle of government is that
protection and rervice are reciprocal. Surely, where the first is
refused the latter should not be required. That your laws contemplate no
such injustice I am the more convinced, not alone from the general
spirit that pervades them, but especially from the perusal of
twoofinions given by the legal counsel of the Kingdom having special
reference to cases similar to the one under consideration. One of
theseofinions bears directly upon the facts as presented in the case of
Catechi. Bothofinions are dated June 14, 1886, and numbered 16 and 17,
and may be found in the “Collection ofofinions and Sentences of the
Legal Council in Doubtful Administration,” pages 290 and 291. Both
theseofinions illustrate the liberality that pervades your laws. I
shall, however, content myself by quoting but one, No. 17, which most
singularly and fully covers the case under consideration. Thisofinion
was delivered upon the appeal of A to hold S to military service so that
A might be released therefrom. The case, as stated, was “whether the
acquirer of a foreign allegiance is regarded as a foreigner if he was a
minor when he asked permission therefor.” Theofinion of the legal
council is as follows:
“Whereas, since the appellant, citizen A, does not dispute that conscript
S, against whom the appeal is taken, had, before his conscription,
obtained a foreign citizenship and is regarded now as a foreigner;
and
“Whereas it is immaterial whether he was under age when he asked for the
Hellenic Government’s permission:
“Therefore, because he was able, even without such permission, to change
his nationality, subject only to the penalty prescribed in the penal
laws, the essential question is whether he legally acquired the foreign
allegiance according to the laws of that foreign state, which is not
disputed in the present case.
“Accordingly the court denies the appeal of A.”
It will be seen from thisofinion that your highest court decides that a
minor can, without the royal assent, change his nationality, subject
only to the penalty prescribed in the penal laws.
On this vital point the opinion fully covers the case of Emmanuel C.
Catechi.
He emigrated during his minority and became an American citizen without
the royal assent, but on his return to Greece, being subject only to the
penalty prescribed in the penal laws, he suffered the punishment,
thereby exhausted the penalty, and is
[Page 519]
no longer amenable to Greek law as a subject but
as an alien. It must logically follow that he was unlawfully conscripted
and is now held in your military service in violation of his rights as
an American citizen and in violation of your own laws as expounded by
your highest judicial tribunal having cognizance in such cases.
The proofs that Catechi was naturalized as an American citizen in
accordance with the law of the United States, to which he claims
allegiance, are conclusive and have not been disputed. You will find
them on file in your office. They include a copy of his naturalization
papers issued by the authority of the United States and a passport based
thereon issued by the State Department at Washington.
In referring to another point to which I had the honor to allude in our
personal discussion of this case, I beg to say that I do not do so for
the purpose of strengthening the case under consideration, which
requires nothing further in fact or in law to effect the immediate
release of Catechi from your military service. It is nevertheless an
interesting point to consider that Catechi was not born a subject of
Greece, but at a period when the Ionian Islands were under British rule,
and, further, that before he had arrived either at manhood or at the age
at which conscription is authorized, he removed to the United States,
and, after remaining there for the period required by our laws, became a
naturalized American citizen. The transfer of the Ionian Islands to
Greece by Great Britain took place when Catechi was but 4 years old,
and, although there is no reference in the text of the treaty of
transfer as to the future status of the inhabitants of these islands, it
must be gravely doubted whether a child born as a citizen or subject of
a country can have the birthright of nationality taken away when as an
infant he is unable legally to assent or dissent. It should be
remembered that Catechi, at the earliest lawful period after his
emigration to the United States, became an American citizen, which as an
English-born subject he had a lawful right to become under treaty
stipulations between Great Britain and the United States. I submit that
in this he committed no offense against the laws of any country to which
he held lawful or natural allegiance.
Passing from this point, it must not be forgotten that Catechi left
Greece before the age at which, even if a subject of Greece, he could be
called to perform military service. He did not leave your country to
evade any duty, but as a youth he departed from the land of his birth to
find a home elsewhere, leaving no obligation unsatisfied.
All the facts and circumstances surrounding this case, and the spirit of
your laws as applied to them, make earnest appeal for the prompt release
of Catechi, who has been permitted to remain too long in the service of
a Government to which he holds no allegiance, and to which he is made to
render an unwilling and unnatural service. I therefore, on behalf of my
Government, renew the request for the immediate release of, Catechi from
your military service on the ground of his American citizenship and
orhis legal exemption under the judgment of 1886, and that steps be
taken to prevent his future molestation on this ground.
I seize, etc.,
