Baron Fava to Mr.
Blaine.
[Translation.]
Royal
Legation of Italy,
Washington, August 8, 1890.
(Received August 20.)
Mr. Secretary of State: The Government of the
King, to which I duly communicated the contents of Your Excellency’s
note of 23d of June last, has just sent me the dispatch the text of
which I have the honor to inclose, together with a copy of the note
referred to by the aforesaid dispatch.
It appears from these documents that negotiations were set on foot in
January, 1889, between the royal ministry of foreign affairs and the
United States legation at Rome looking to the adoption of an article
additional to the extradition convention of 1868 between Italy and the
United States, the design of which article was to prohibit the surrender
of the subjects of each of the two contracting parties, and to provide,
at the same time, for a convention of naturalization between the two
countries which would have been rendered necessary by the new
article.
As the aforesaid note of the Department of State made no mention of the
negotiations in question, I hereby have the honor, in obedience to the
instructions of my Government, to remind Your Excellency of them, and to
inform you that my Government would be very glad to receive
[Page 569]
a reply from that of the
United States with regard to the counter propositions contained in the
note addressed to Mr. Stallo under date of April 27, 1889.
Your Excellency is doubtless aware that the King’s minister of foreign
affairs addressed Mr. Porter, the new representative of the Republic at
Rome, in relation to this matter on the 24th of May last.
Be pleased to accept, etc.,
[Inclosure
1.—Translation.]
Signor Damiani
to Baron Fava.
Mr. Minister: I was not a little surprised
to see that in his note of the 23d ultimo, Mr. Blaine made no
reference to the negotiations which have been on foot since January,
1889, having been commenced with Mr. Stallo, with a view to the
adoption of an article additional to the extradition convention of
1868 between Italy and the United States, the object of said article
being the prohibition of the surrender by each state of its own
subjects or citizens and the signing of a convention of
naturalization by the two countries such as would be rendered
necessary by the new article. These negotiations grew out of the
question raised by the extradition of Salvatore Paladini, an Italian
subject, which was asked for by the United States Government. With a
view to avoiding any controversy in such matters in future, Mr.
Stallo proposed the adoption of an article declaring that neither
country was under obligations to surrender its own subjects, and, at
the same time, the negotiation of a naturalization convention
similar to that existing between the United States and Belgium.
The Royal Government received this proposition favorably, examined it
carefully, and, on the 27th of April, 1889, addressed a note to Mr.
Stallo, in which, while accepting his proposition in general, it
proposed a few modifications in the draft which he had presented,
which modifications were rendered indispensable by our laws; it
suggested, moreover, an addition to the article relative to
extradition, in order to prevent the extradition convention from
being rendered ineffectual by a change of citizenship.
Under date of April 30, 1889, Mr. Stallo expressed his
personalofinion that our counter propositions would meet with no
serious objections at Washington, adding that he would communicate
them to his Government. During the period that has elapsed since
then (especially since the negotiations were initiated by Mr. Stallo
exclusively), the United States Government should have been fully
informed on this subject, particularly since, as I informed Your
Excellency in my dispatch of the 24th of May last, I on that day
requested Mr. Porter, the new representative of the United States,
to be pleased to solicit a reply from his Government.
At all events, I deem it proper to transmit to Your Excellency, that
you may communicate it to Mr. Blaine, a copy of the note addressed
to Mr. Stallo under date April 27, 1889, wherein our views on the
subjects in question are clearly set forth.
Damiani,
Assistant Secretary of State.
[Inclosure
2.—Translation.]
Royal ministry of foreign
affairs to United States legation
at Rome.
The royal ministry of foreign affairs has carefully considered the
proposition addressed to it by the United States legation,
concerning the addition of an article to the convention relative to
extradition which is now in force between Italy and the United
States, according to which article neither party is to surrender its
own citizens, and also concerning the negotiation by the two States
of a naturalization convention.
The Government of the King favors, in general, the adoption of these
two pacts, which, however, in view of their different natures,
should be perfectly distinct from each other. In relation to the
draft communicated by the United States legation, the Royal
Government has the following observations to make:
[Page 570]
The article additional to the extradition convention, which reads as
follows. “Neither of the contracting parties shall be obliged to
surrender its own citizens or subjects by reason of the stipulations
of the convention of March 23, 1868,” accords with our views
entirely. Another article should be added to this, however, it being
rendered necessary by the proposed naturalization convention. It
should conform to article 4 of the convention of February 5, 1873,
between Italy and Great Britain. The new article should read as
follows:
“Art. 2. Naturalization obtained in either
of the contracting states by a person charged with or convicted of a
crime, after its commission, shall be no bar to a demand for his
extradition or to his surrender. Nevertheless, the extradition may
be refused if 5 years have elapsed since the naturalization was
obtained and if the person whose extradition is demanded has during
such time had his domicile in the state to which the demand is
addressed.”
As regards the naturalization convention, the Government of the King
has no objections to taking as a basis the naturalization convention
now in force between the United States and Belgium, although it
considers a few modifications necessary in order to bring it in
harmony with the laws of the Kingdom of Italy.
The first article of the convention taken as a basis, which
authorizes the citizens of both countries to renounce their
citizenship, is accepted by the Royal Government with the following
reservation: The Italian code recognizes the right of all persons to
become citizens of a foreign country, provided, however, that this
be done with the express or tacit consent of the person and do not
depend solely upon the foreign law or upon the fulfillment of some
condition. Now, the acquirement of citizenship is understood in
America very differently from what it is in the states of Europe.
Thus it is that a foreigner there might, under certain
circumstances, be considered, independently of his own will, as an
American citizen. The Government of the King, therefore, desiring to
establish the principle of freedom in the choice of citizenship, and
with a view to avoiding mistakes in the enforcement of the
convention in question, proposes the addition of the following
clause to the said article: “on condition, however, that the
naturalization has been acquired with the consent of the person and
does not solely depend upon the law or the fulfillment of certain
conditions.”
Article 2 of the draft might, perhaps, be interpreted in a manner not
in accord with the penal laws of Italy. It is thereby provided that
citizens of the contracting parties returning to their native
country may be prosecuted for crimes or offenses committed before
they were naturalized, on which the argument might be based that
such citizens could not be prosecuted for crimes committed since
their naturalization. The Italian penal code, on the other hand,
provides for various cases in which even a foreigner, on setting
foot in the territory of the Kingdom, may be prosecuted for crimes
committed in a foreign country. The number of such cases is
considerably increased by the new Italian penal code, which will
shortly be published. In order, therefore, that the Government of
the King may be enabled to accept the article in question, it should
be expressly stated therein that the provisions that would be
applicable in the case of a foreigner will be enforced in the case
of crimes or offenses committed since the naturalization of the
perpetrator.
Article 3 of the convention as formulated by the United States
Government, exempting from military service citizens of one state
who have become naturalized in the other and have resided there for
5 years, can by no means be accepted by the King’s Government,
inasmuch as article 12 of the civil code provides that the loss of
citizenship exempts no person from the obligation to perform
military duty. That article would, moreover, render it very easy for
an Italian citizen to avoid the fulfillment of that obligation,
since, after having become naturalized as an American citizen, and
having resided for 5 years in the United States, he might return to
his country without being liable to the penalties provided by the
military penal code for deserters, as the Italian law declares all
persons to be who, when summoned to bear arms, do not respond to the
call.
Finally, the Royal Government has no objections to make to articles 4
and 5 of the draft. With regard to article 6, it may be observed
that it is not necessary, so far as we are concerned, to mention the
consent of the Parliament, since the agreement in question involves
no charge upon the treasury of the state, nor, if the proposed
modifications are accepted, any change in the laws now in force.
Having thus set forth the objections which it has to the proposition
of the legation of the United States of America, the royal ministry
of foreign affairs feels confident that the United States Government
will take them into kind consideration and introduce the above
modifications either in the article additional to the extradition
convention or in the naturalization convention.
The royal ministry of foreign affairs will be glad to be made
acquainted, in due time, with the decision of the United States
Government.
