Mr. Wetter to
Mr. Uhl.
Consulate of the United States,
Tamatave, April 20, 1895. (Received May
31.)
No. 88.]
Sir: I have the honor, in continuation of
my No. 82, of March 25, 1895, to transmit yon herein such documents,
copies of letters, etc., as I have in hand re this affair, as also
to state that, contrary to my expectations, neither copies of the
evidence, minutes of proceedings, or of the letters, etc.,
introduced in this affair have been sent me.
The night before Bray’s departure he brought me down a packet of
papers and requested that I keep same until he could safely send for
them. A little questioning brought out the fact that they were the
notes made by Waller’s lawyer, the Frenchman, Le Garrac, from the
evidence against Waller. He then offered them to me if I would
dispatch them to the Department, On examination I find same very
incomplete, so much so as not to be worth transmitting. Should the
Department, however, desire them I will translate and transmit them
at once.
Now, as to such details as I have not given in my two former
dispatches or as are not contained in inclosures.
[Page 320]
Waller, about January 20, sent a letter addressed to a Mr. Tessier,
an English-Mauritian at Antananarivo, a friend of his. Therein was a
letter addressed to Waller’s wife. Both these letters were dated
January 23, 1895, but were mailed January 20, by Waller himself, on
board the Umlazi, of the Donald Gurrie Line,
and were addressed “Antananarivo, via Natal and Vatomandry.”
The letter to Tessier was full of gossip from Tamatave of a character
very uncomplimentary to the French soldiers, but not containing any
contraband information. It furthermore called Tessier’s attention in
a very pointed manner to certain news contained in the inclosed
letter to Mrs. Waller, and insisted strenuously that same must be
acted on at once, etc.
The letter to Mrs. Waller started out with a most malignant tirade
against myself of the Geldart-Lyons cases; asserted that myself and
Geldart had conspired to ruin Lyons; that Lyons stood no better
chance to get justice than Waller did before me, etc. Was also very
bitter against Duder, Poupard, and Geldart, using about these
words:“Geldart, Duder, and Poupard are as thick now as three in a
bed, and Wetter is their god. I will inform you that D. and P. are
on their way to Antananarivo, and they will likely reach there long
before this letter leaves Tamatave. Please inform Mr. Tessier and
our friends that both of these men have been sent up there by the
French to find out secretly all the movements of the Hova
Government, which they will send to the French authorities from time
to time. Therefore the Government had better keep a strict watch on
these men and order them from the capital as soon as possible. Both
of them are for the French.* * * And please destroy it (the letter)
as soon as you and Mr. Tessier have read it, and do not mention to
anyone but Mr. Tessier and the secretaries about the information
which I send you.” The letter then gives a two or three page
dissertation on the difficulties of living in Tamatave, some very
bitter anecdotes about the French ravaging Malagassy women, and
winds up with instructions that if Waller should die of smallpox
from being here Mrs. Waller was to have his solicitors in Washington
sue the Administration and myself for $20,000 damages, with
interest, for forcing him to remain here exposed to such dangers,
etc.
Among Waller’s papers seized at his house they found some letters
from a Malagassy named Ratsimanana, which related mainly to a
recital of the many endeavors he had made to borrow money for Waller
so as to pay off the Crockett claim, and to some commissions Waller
was to execute for him in London. Another, I believe, spoke of some
revolvers Waller had promised him; and another had a passage cut
out. Of this letter Waller said in an unmailed letter to his wife,
found among his papers, I believe, “It was a godsend that they
didn’t get to open Ratsimanana’s letter. If they had Paul would have
been shot on suspicion. Let me warn you to be careful.”
Personally, I have no doubt, nor has anyone else here, white or
black, that had Waller’s letters of January 23 reached Antananarivo,
Duder and Poupard would have been murdered. Whether Waller really
meant them by “D. and P.,” I cannot say. He says it was Draper and
Purdy, but no one ever heard of such parties at the capital, while
Duder and Poupard were supposed to be in Antananarivo at the same
time he wrote these letters.
But, in my opinion, none of this business concerned the French. If
Waller were scoundrel enough to attempt to have these men’s lives
taken by the Hovas, as they were Americans it would concern this
consular court and not the French.
[Page 321]
Waller was not here of his own volition. He was here because he dared
not attempt to leave until he had satisfied the Crockett
judgment.
Waller’s wife and a person under British protection, a British
subject like Tessier, could not be considered enemies to France.
Again, these French laws of siege, etc., are for European wars. Where
there is now no extraterritorial jurisdiction accorded consuls they
can’t apply, without grave modifications, in such countries as
Madagascar.
I sent for Le Garrac before the Waller trial and suggested these and
many other points for Waller’s defense, but he was either unwilling
to make use of them or afraid to. I offered him any assistance I
could render him, even as I had done to Girandeau, before he threw
up the case, and sent him the office copies of Wheaton and Wharton,
with salient and pertinent passages marked. He requested me to do
nothing until after the first trial, then if he lost he could use my
influence, etc., on the appeal or revision.
Le Garrac was present when I saw Waller on the 20th, and he, at my
request, had some complaint Waller made about his food attended to.
The very harshness of the sentence—the extreme penalty of the
law—gave Le Garrac great hopes for his appeal. And now he and the
majority here say Waller will be free as soon as the war is over.
Yes, he may be; but the war has not begun yet. It may last a very,
very long time. If the French are not doing any more at Majonga than
they are doing here it certainly will.
I am, etc.,
[Inclosure 1 in No.
88—Translation.]
Notice of arrest.
Division Navale de l’Océan Indien,
Tamatave, le
5 Mars, 1895.
No. 31.]
Mr. Consul: I have the honor, Mr.
Commandant Kiesel being absent, of informing you that I have
to-day issued an order handing over John Waller, who is accused
of having infringed article 3 of the decree of January 18, 1895,
relative to the sending of letters, to the military justice.
Will you accept, etc.,
[Inclosure 2 in No.
88—Translation.]
Lieutenant-Colonel Colonna to Mr. Wetter.
Tamatave, March 5, 1895.
No. 627A.]
Mr. Consul: I have the honor to inform
you that in virtue of an order issued by the deputy of the chief
of the naval squadron, I have had John L. Waller, one of your
countrymen, arrested to be impeached at the military
tribunals.
John Waller took the liberty toward the end of January last to
start on its way to Antananarivo a letter, which he took on
board of the English mail directly. The boat was to carry it to
Natal, whence, according to his calculations, the letter would
be sent direct to Vatomandry, thus escaping the examination of
the military authorities.
By so doing Waller infringed the prescriptions contained in
article 3 of the decree of the deputy of the chief of the naval
squadron dated January 18, 1895.
Besides this infringement the inquest, which I am about to order,
will perhaps reveal graver deeds which the reading of this
clandestine correspondence may make jurisdictionable.
Will you accept, etc.,
Colonna,
Commandant Superior of the Troops and of
the Place in state of Siege
.
[Page 322]
[Inclosure 3 in No.
88.]
Mr. Wetter
to Captain Kiesel.
Consulate of the United States,
Tamatave, March 5, 1895.
No. 212.]
Sir: I have just been informed that at
or about 2 p.m. to-day the gendarmes, acting, it is stated,
under military orders, went to the present residence of Mr. John
L. Waller, an American citizen and ex-consul of the United
States at this place, and seized all his papers, documents,
etc., and arrested his person.
Furthermore, that the said gendarmes also searched and took with
them all papers, documents, etc., in said residence belonging to
another American citizen, one Paul H. Bray.
I furthermore understand that when Mr. Waller demanded their
authority for such high-handed measures he was shown a paper
purporting to be a requisition from the military authorities,
but the parties refused to state what charge was made against
him or give any further information.
I must therefore request that I be immediately informed why Mr.
Waller has been arrested, and on what charges; also where he has
been incarcerated, etc.
As to my knowledge this person has been leading a most peaceable
and quiet existence since his arrival here in September last. I
must express my surprise at this action against him, which can
only be warranted by a most grave breach of the laws, and
sincerely hope for the sake of the good relations and friendship
between France and the United States that the evidence in hand
will warrant such extreme measures.
Requesting your earliest attention, I am, etc.,
[Inclosure 4 in No.
88.]
Mr. Waller’s appeal to Mr. Wetter.
Military Prison, Tamatave, March 18, 1895.
Dear Sir: Mr. Woodford called to see me
this evening and says that you are doing all you can to get me
released from this trouble, which I am surprised and pleased to
hear, since Mr. Girandeau told me that you positively informed
him that you would not aid me in any manner. I think if I had
had the benefit of your official influence to-day the judgment
might have been different. But be that as it may I wish to ask
your assistance and aid as an American citizen, as I have taken
an appeal from judgment of to-day. I wish also to ask your
pardon for the manner in which I mention your name in a letter
to my wife, dated, I think, January 23, 1895. It was done in the
heat of passion and under great mental pressure; therefore I
here and now recall and expunge every reference to you from said
letter. This I offered to do to Mr. Girandeau, but it seems that
you refused it. Please aid me as an American, as you are the
only official representative we have here.
Trusting to receive an affirmative reply, and that Mr. Woodford
was not mistaken when he assured me that you will help me, and
that you will pardon me for the adverse words used about you in
the letter mentioned.
I have the honor to be, your obedient servant,
John L. Waller.
United States
Consulate,
Tamatave, April 17,
1895.
I certify that the foregoing is an exact and verbatim copy of the
original on file in this office.
Edward Telfair
Wetter,
United States Consul,
Acting
.
[Inclosure 5 in No.
88.]
Mr. Wetter
to Mr. Waller.
Consulate of the United States,
Tamatave, March 20, 1895.
No. 213.]
Sir: Your note dated March 18 was
received on the afternoon of the 19th. It would have been
replied to the same day but for certain assertions therein
contained which I deemed it advisable to first inquire into.
[Page 323]
In view of your knowledge of paragraph 432, Consular Regulations,
which states, “But their efforts should not be extended to those
who have been willfully guilty of an infraction of the local
laws,” I can understand your surprise at my using my consular
position for the purpose of in any way protecting or attempting
to secure you any amelioration of the penalty you have thus
willfully laid yourself open to.
Such assistance as I can lawfully render you I have and will
willingly accord you at all times, but you must distinctly
understand that I can not take any steps for your benefit that
do not come within the rights of every American, nor can I raise
on your behalf any issue that may result in jeopardizing
American interests or rights here unless such action be fully
warranted in my opinion by the law of nations or be directly
ordered by the Department of State.
As to the language made use of by you in the letter you mention,
I do not desire to discuss that matter with you. There is no
apology or excuse that you can possibly offer for same that will
at all excuse it. Personally I am not a man to bear malice
against anyone, nor have I ever indulged in the cowardly habits
of “backbiting” and of kicking a man when he is down; therefore
whatever I can lawfully do for you in my official capacity, I
repeat, I have done and will continue to do.
There were two passages in your note which seemed to me
inexplicable (I allude to the paragraphs wherein you state,
respectively, “Since Mr. Girandeau told that you positively
informed him that you would not aid me in any manner.” * * * “I
here and now recall and expunge every reference to you from said
letter; this I offered to do to Mr. Girandeau, but it seems that
you refused it” * * *); therefore I called upon Mr. Girandeau
and showed them to him this last evening, only to receive the
assurance that they were false and untrue and base perversions
on your part, Mr. Girandeau having never given you any such
information nor held any conversation with me concerning such
desire on your part to excuse the language you mention.
I shall lay before the Department of State the full details of
your case and request their consideration thereof. I do not
feel, however, that I am warranted in holding out any great hope
to you of immediate action, as I greatly fear your dastardly
attempt on the lives of D. and P. will be apt to prejudice the
mass of your fellow-countrymen against you. Absolute justice and
protection against oppression will undoubtedly be accorded you,
but you ought scarcely to expect clemency.
I will call about 4.30 p.m. this afternoon at the jail to see you
if there be any matter whereof you specially desire the
Department to be informed or wherein I can officially assist
you.
I am, etc.,
[Inclosure 6 in No.
88.]
Mr. Wetter’s protest to French
commandant.
Consulate of the United States,
Tamatave, March 21, 1895.
No. 214.]
Sir: I have the honor to call your
attention to the fact that my letter, No. 212, of March 5, 1895,
has up to date received no acknowledgment at your hands. It is
true your Deputy Commandant Campion’s letter, No. 31, of March
5, was received just after the dispatching of my said
communication, but as it did not reply to nor was it evidently
intended as a reply to my said No. 212, no action was taken by
this consulate in relation thereto over and beyond the
nomination and temporary appointment of Mr. G. Girandeau, an
attorney, to examine into Mr. Waller’s case, and to report to
this consulate the status, etc., thereof, with the ultimate
intention, if necessary, of his defending Mr. Waller, which
intention was not carried out, for reasons not here necessary to
mention, and was an entirely unofficial act on my part, and
therefore was and is an absolutely immaterial matter in the past
and present status of Mr. Waller’s case.
Permit me to add, however, that I have daily expected some
notification in reply to my No. 212 from yourself or your
subordinates as to the charge whereunder Mr. Waller was being or
was about to be tried, the character of the evidence whereon
said charge was based, and, lastly, the time and place of trial.
I regret to say that officially none of these essential facts
have ever been communicated to me. As far as I understand
Commandant Campion’s letter of March 5, and that of M. Colonna,
colonel superior, etc., of the same date and received about the
same time, and unanswered-pending receipt of further information
from yourself, or deputy, in reply to my said No. 212, it was
merely the statement that Mr. Waller had been arrested and was
to be tried for an infraction of article 111 of a printed
military order dated January 18, 1895, but not received at this
consulate until after the departure of the mail of January 28,
1895, by the mailing of letter or packet of letters on board the
English steamship Umlazi on or about
January 20, without the
[Page 324]
same having been first viséed by the military authorities. It
is true that the letter of M. Colonna, colonel superior, etc.,
suggested the probability that a perusal of said letter of Mr.
Waller’s might show cause for a more grave charge being made
against him than the one whereunder he was arrested.
I would further state that under such circumstances this
consulate felt scarcely warranted in interfering in the matter,
it being nominally so petty a misdemeanor as to be punishable by
a very petty fine only; feeling, furthermore, confident that an
American—never mind what his color or status—would always meet
with every leniency and with absolute justice at the hands of
yourself and subordinates.
To my surprise, the arraignment of Mr. Waller was made on an
entirely different ground and for an entirely different offense
than the one nominally stated to this consulate in M. Campion’s
and M. Colonna’s letters above referred to, and this without any
official notice to this consulate of any kind whatsoever.
Furthermore, the trial was held and judgment given under the same
circumstances of absolute official silence and
noncommunication.
Without at present going into the question as to what tribunal
under the law of nations has and had actual jurisdiction over
Mr. Waller in this instance, I must add that the sentence
imposed upon Mr. Waller seems to me so heavy, the circumstances
above alluded to so unusual, and the question of jurisdiction so
grave that I feel compelled to refer this case to the Secretary
of State of the United States for the consideration of my
Government; I would, therefore, request that you will kindly
favor me with properly authenticated copies of the entire
evidence, charge, proceedings, and judgment in the case for
transmission to the United States.
Should it be possible to furnish me these documents prior to the
departure of the next French mail steamer, your courtesy will be
all the more augmented and appreciated.
In conclusion, permit me to state that I have indirectly heard
that a revision of this judgment may be shortly held; if so, I
would further request a copy of such revisions, etc, for like
transmission to my Government.
And, finally, I would request information as to where the
sentence found against Mr. Waller is to be carried into
effect.
Thanking yon in advance for the expected courtesy of your
earliest attention, I am, etc.,
[Inclosure 7 in No.
88—Translation.]
French commandant’s reply.
From on Board, March 22, 1895.
No. 85.]
Mr. Consul: I have the honor to
acknowledge the receipt of your letter, No. 214, of March 21,
1895, received to-day.
I regret not to agree with you on the subject of yours, No. 212,
of March 5. Letter 31, of March 5, which Commandant Campion, who
replaced me during my absence, wrote you, answered your
question. Moreover, it results from the declaration of the
Government commissary near the council of war that M. Girandeau,
who had introduced himself as the barrister of J. Waller and had
taken copies of the papers of the case, imparted to you the
whole or part of those documents. I will not here qualify the
irregularity of this proceeding, which is absolutely opposed to
all the rules admitted by French justice, and of which, for the
time being, M. Girandeau is alone to bear the responsibility.
Lastly, your letter of March 20, which the military authority
handed to J. Waller, proves that yon had daily kept yourself
posted on the affair, although you never officially interfered
in it. I am led to conclude that it was intentionally you kept
aloof of the suit begun by the military authority. It is no
business of mine to seek the reasons for your so doing. I have
only to note that you have purposely done so from the beginning,
and have knowingly allowed the Waller case to follow its regular
course without even asking to be allowed to correspond with the
accused man. As on all former occasions, you may rest assured
that I should have held it a point of honor to confirm our
friendly intercourse by enabling you to follow the Waller case.
I should have done so the more willingly, as to the sincere
regret that I experienced on finding an American citizen full of
hatred for France was added the sentiment of an act of justice
to be rendered by the French army to two American citizens,
Messrs. Duder and Poupard, whose lives should have been greatly
imperiled had the accusations, as cowardly as false, of J.
Waller reached the Hova officers they were to have been imparted
to.
Justice has had its course, and now escapes my action. Until the
case is closed, i. e., three days after the execution of the
judgment, I can not give you a copy of the papers relating to
it. The appeal is public, like the trial by the council was. I
will order that you be officially notified of the date and hour
of the judging.
[Page 325]
As sequel to the Waller case, on report of the military authority
and after acquainting myself with the writings seized, I have
to-day, March 22, decreed the expulsion; of P. Bray, son-in-law
of J. Waller, who is guilty of having infringed the regulation
concerning letters and of having transmitted to the Hovas
compromising documents. This decision will be carried out
immediately by the Djeunah, of the
Messageries Maritimes.
[Inclosure 8 in No.
88.]
Mr. Wetter
to Captain Kiesel.
Consulate of the United States,
Tamatave, March 24, 1895.
No. 216.]
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge
the receipt of your letter No. 85, of March 22, about 6.30 p.m.
of that date.
I regret to note, from the tenor of your letter, that you are
under a misapprehension and that “M. le Commissaire du
Gouvernement, pres le Conseil de Guerre” has materially
contributed thereto. I will state that Mr. Girandeau, while
acting as attorney for Mr. Waller (under the impression that I
would personally guarantee his attorney’s fee), did make copies
of the record in some preliminary hearing held in the Waller
matter, the date of this hearing, the evidence, even the charge
found against Mr. Waller are unknown to me, except by public
rumor of the most fragmentary description. Mr. Girandeau did
show me at my request a copy or what purported to be a copy of
letters written by Mr. Waller, one to Tessier and one to Mrs.
Waller, but as to any records, evidence, or other such
documents, none such, nor any copies thereof, have I, or anyone
representing me, seen; nor has any copy of the letters above
mentioned been made by this consulate, or anyone else on my
behalf.
That Mr. Girandeau, after examining the case, refused to defend
Mr. Waller unless he were paid a fee of $150; that Mr. Waller’s
friends refused to contribute anything toward the payment or
security of said fee; that the other Americans in Tamatave also
refused to so contribute, thus leaving the onus thereof, if
paid, on my private and personal funds (a burden which I was not
disposed to bear), is sufficiently well known not to need
further comment; therefore I would suggest that the strictures
contained in your letter are neither just to Mr. Girandeau nor
toward myself.
I regret to note that you are not in accord with myself as to my
letter No. 212, not having been replied to, nor as to the
position this consulate has assumed in this Waller affair, and
can only confirm my No. 214 of March 21.
In view of the fact that whatever my personal feelings were, or
are, toward Mr. Waller, after the perusal of the letters first
before mentioned, my duty as an official positively prohibits my
permitting same to influence my official relations toward him.
You will kindly permit me to pass over that portion of your
letter referring directly to these letters in silence.
I shall take the liberty of expecting to receive, as soon as you
can legally transmit them, the various copies asked for in my
No. 214, and will notify my Government that they will go forward
by next mail.
Meanwhile I would thank you for your courtesy in the matter of
the appeal, as also for the order to the registrar of the court
of appeals, whose notice, unfortunately, reached me so late in
the day as to preclude my attendance thereat, owing to previous
engagements until near the close of the case.
Your note as to the intended expulsion of Paul Bray, stepson
(beau-fils) of J. Waller, was read with considerable
surprise.
In view of the fact that I was informed by the adjutant of M.
Colonna, in the Bussell case, that matters between consuls and
M. Colonna must come through your hands, I have the honor to
hand you herewith a letter for M. le Lieutenant-Colonel,
commandant supérieur, etc., in reply to his letter on the
subject of Bray’s expulsion and, inviting your attention
thereto, would request a copy of the order of expulsion.
With assurances, etc.,
[Inclosure 9 in No.
88—Translation.]
Captain Kiesel to Mr. Wetter.
Division Navale de l’Océan Indien,
Aviso
de lre
classe Le Papni,
commandant,
Bord,
le
24 mars
1895.
I have been officially notified that the judgment returned
against J. Waller, an American subject, by the council of war
sitting at Tamatave has been carried out.
[Page 326]
Referring to your letter No. 214,
I have immediately requested an authentic copy of the judgment,
and have the honor to inclose it herewith.
Will you accept, etc.,
[Inclosure 10 in No.
88—Translation.]
Judgment rendered by French military
tribunal.
Marine first permanent council of war, sitting at Tamatave,
French Republic.
In the name of the French people, the first permanent council of
war has rendered the judgment, the terms of which follow:
This day, March 18, 1895.
The first permanent council of war composed in accordance with
articles 3 and 10 of the maritime code of Messrs. Lacarriere,
captain of the marine infantry, president; Bardaine, lieutenant
of the marine infantry; Bouquez, lieutenant of the marine
infantry; Nicaise, adjutant of the marine infantry, judges; all
appointed by the lieutenant-colonel, superior commander of the
troops and place of Tamatave in state of seige. Mr. Maroix,
sublieutenant, deputy government commissary; Mr. Marengar,
sergeant-major, recorder of the said council, who are, none of
them, in the state of incompatibility foreseen by articles 22,
23, and 24 of the above-mentioned code.
The council assembled by order of the lieutenant-colonel superior
commander of the troops and place of Tamatave in state of siege
in conformity with article 141 of the code of maritime justice,
met, in the ordinary place of its sessions, in public audience,
to judge John Waller, born January 12, 1850, at New Madrid, in
the province of Missouri, United States of America, a journalist
residing at present at Tamatave, aged 45.
Accused of first, violating the prescriptions contained in
article 3 of the decree of January 18, 1895, of the delegate of
the chief of the naval squadron, an infraction foreseen by
article 471, paragraph 15, of the penal code applicable in
virtue of article 364 of the code of military laws for the navy;
second, of corresponding with the enemy, a crime foreseen and
punished by articles 2 and 78 of the ordinary penal code, aimed
at by article 304 of the code of military laws for the navy
(army of the sea).
The session being opened, the president had a copy of military
laws for the armies of land and sea, one of the code of criminal
information, and another of the penal code brought and placed on
the desk in front of him, and ordered the accused man, who
appeared free and with no fetters, to be introduced, together
with his counsel.
Examined through the medium of Mr. Paul Dupousel, aged 38, a
merchant, residing Avenue 1, Tamatave, sworn in the manner
prescribed by law, on his name, Christian name, place of birth,
profession, and place of residence, he answered that he was
named John Waller, was born on January 12, 1850, at New Madrid,
in the province of Missouri, United States of America, that he
was a journalist, and resided for the present at Tamatave.
The president, after having had the order convoking the council,
the report prescribed by article 138 of the code of maritime
laws, and those documents the hearing of which he considered
necessary read by the recorder, told the accused man the facts
for which he was prosecuted and cautioned him and his counsel as
directed to do in article 151 of the above code.
After which he examined the accused, heard the witnesses publicly
and singly, the said witnesses having previously sworn to speak,
without any hatred or fear, the truth and nothing but the truth.
One of them, Paul Bray, was heard through the medium of Mr. Paul
Dupousel, sworn interpreter. The president also fulfilled toward
them the formalities prescribed by articles 317 and 319 of the
criminal code.
Mr. Molyneux was then heard for the sake of information, without
being sworn, in virtue of the discretionary power possessed by
the president.
Through the medium of Mr. Dupousel, sworn interpreter, the
prosecution proofs having again been presented to the culprit,
who recognized them.
Mr. Commissary of the Government held out that John L. Waller,
journalist, residing at Tamatave, be found guilty, first, of
infringing the prescriptions of article 3 of the decree of
January 18, 1895, issued by the delegate of the chief of the
naval squadron; second, of attempting to correspond with
subjects of a hostile nation, an attempt the end of which was to
furnish the enemy with instructions prejudicial to the military
and political situation of France; and that the council decree
the confiscation to the profit of the State of all documents
which had served in the perpetration of the crime, in conformity
with article 11 of the penal code, aimed at by article 74 of the
code of maritime laws.
The accused and his counsel, who were the last to speak, haying
declared that
[Page 327]
they had
nothing to add to their defense, the president then pronounced
the debate closed and ordered the accused and his counsel to
retire.
The tribunal withdrew to the chamber of deliberation.
The council deliberated privately, and the president, in
conformity with article 162 of the maritime code, set to them
the following questions:
- 1.
- Is the accused man guilty of having infringed article
3 of the decree issued January 18, 1895, by the delegate
of the chief of the naval squadron?
- 2.
- Is he guilty of having carried on with the enemy a
correspondence injurious to the military and political
situation of France?
- 3.
- Was the act committed under aggravating
circumstances?
- 4.
- Was the act committed under attenuating
circumstances?
The votes were then collected, in conformity with articles 161
and 163 of the code of military laws, beginning with the lowest
grade upward, the president being the last to remit his opinion,
and the council returned.
To the first question: The verdict of “Yes; the accused is
guilty, unanimously.”
To the second question: The verdict of “Yes; the accused is
guilty, unanimously.”
To the third question: The verdict of “Yes; the accused is
guilty, by a majority of three voices.”
To the fourth question: “No; unanimously.”
On which, and seeing the demands of the Government commissary in
his requisitions, the president read the text of the law, and
again, in the manner prescribed by articles 161 and 164 of the
code of maritime laws, collected the votes for the appliance of
the penalty. The council sat publicly again and the president
read the foregoing motives and enacting clause.
The council in consequence condemned, by a majority of three,
John Waller to twenty years’ detention, conformably with the
hereinafter-mentioned Articles of law, and decreed the
confiscation to the profit of the State, as proofs at
conviction, of all papers produced during the course of the
suit.
Penal code.
Art. 11. Expelling under the special
superintendence of the high police, fines, and confiscation
either of the instruments of the crime when they belong to the
culprit or of the things produced by the crime, whether they
were used or only designed to perpetrate it, are penalties
commonly inflicted in criminal and correctional suits.
Art. 2. Every attempt at a crime
evinced by a beginning of execution, if not delayed or if not
succeeding through circumstances independent from the will of
its perpetrator only, is considered as the crime itself.
Art. 78. If a correspondence with
subjects of a hostile nation, not having for object one of the
crimes stipulated in the preceding article, nevertheless
furnished the enemy informations injurious to the military or
political situation of France or her allies, those holding it
will be punished by detention without any prejudice to a higher
penalty in the case where those informations should afterwards
be found to be the result of an arrangement constituting an act
of espionage.
Art. 47 (paragraph 15). Those
contravening to regulations lawfully enacted by the
administrative authority and those not conforming with
regulations or decrees issued by the municipal authority will
be, in virtue of articles 3 and 4, title page 11, of the law of
August 16 and 24, 1790, and of article 46, title page 1, of the
law of July 19 and 22, 1791, punished with a fine of from 1 to 5
francs.
Code of military laws for the
army of sea.
Art. 74. Tribunals of the navy (only
statute on public suits at law): They can nevertheless order the
restitution to their owners of the things seized or of the
proofs at conviction when there is no need for their
confiscation.
Art. 104. All accused persons, without
distinction, are summoned before councils of war or of justice,
first, when they are all sailors or soldiers of the army of sea
or assimilated to sailors and soldiers, even when one or several
of them are not, in reason of their position at the time of the
crime or delinquency, amenable to those tribunals; second, when
the crime or delinquency is committed by persons amenable to the
councils of war or of justice and by foreigners, whether on
French territory or on a foreign territory occupied by French
troops; third, when the crime or delinquency is committed in a
foreign country in the district about an expeditionary
force.
Art. 384. Naval tribunals apply to all
the crimes and delinquencies not foreseen by the present code
the penalties ascribed to them in the ordinary penal laws, and
in cases where the law permits the admission of attenuating
circumstances article 463 of the penal code may be applied.
Decree of the delegate of the chief of the
naval squadron.
Art. 3. The lieutenant of the port is
given the superintendence over mails at their arrivals and
departures. No mails can be distributed except by the
post-office, and
[Page 328]
all
cables must be sent through it. No mails can be dispatched
except through the post-office. Exceptions to this rule must
each time be specially obtained from the delegate of the chief
of the naval squadron or, in his absence, from the municipal
administrator.
Article 135 of the military laws: In cases of conviction of
several crimes only the highest penalty is applied.
Penal code, article 20: Whoever is condemned to detention will be
kept in one of the forts situated on the continental territory
of the Republic named in a decree issued in the form of the
regulations of the public administration. Detention can not be
passed for less than five nor for more than twenty years, except
in the cases mentioned in article 33.
Code of military laws for the army of sea, article 169: The
judgment passing a penalty on an accused person also condemns
him to the costs toward the State. It ordains, in cases foreseen
by the law, confiscation of the objects seized and restitution
to the profit of the State or of their owners of all things
seized and produced during the course of the suit as evidence.
Enjoins the Government commissary to have the present judgment
read immediately to the prisoner in his presence and that of the
watch under arms, and to inform him that the law gives him
twenty-four hours to appeal.
Done, closed, and judged, without leaving, in public session held
at Tamatave the day, month, and year hereafter, and the members
of the council and the registrar signed the minute of the
present judgment.
Lacarriere.
Dardanie.
Bouquet.
Gaguepani.
Nicaise.
Marenger.
On the 8th day of March, 1895, the foregoing judgment was read by
us, the undersigned clerk and registrar, to the prisoner, who
was besides informed by the Government commissary, in presence
of the watch assembled under arms, that articles 171 and 173 of
the code of maritime laws gave him twenty-four hours after the
expiration of the present day to appeal.
The Government commissary:
Maroix.
The registrar:
Marenger.
In consequence the President of the Republic commands and orders
all bailiffs to execute this judgment, all attorneys-general and
attorneys of the Republic near tribunals of first suits to see
to it being enforced, and all commanders and officers of the
public staff to lend their assistance when lawfully requested to
do so.
The appeal having been rejected on March 23, the above judgment
was executed on March 24, 1895.
The costs amounted to the sum of 12 francs and 50 centimes.
The registrar:
Marenger.
Judicial antecedents, nil.
Seen.
The Government commissary:
Maroix.
Certified to be a true copy.
The registrar:
Agarrel.
Seen and forwarded to Mr. United States Consul.
The captain, delegate of the chief of the naval squadron:
G. N. Kiesel.
I certify the above and foregoing 18 pages to contain an accurate
copy of the judgment on file in this consulate, and received on
the evening of March 24, 1895, from Commandant Kiesel; also to
contain a fairly trustworthy translation of same into
English.
Edw. Telfair
Wetter
.
Tamatave, April 17, 1895.
[Page 329]
[Inclosure 11 in No.
88.]
Mr. Wetter
to Captain Kiesel.
Consulate of the United States,
Tamatave, April 16, 1895.
No. 223.]
Mr. Commandant: I would call your
attention to the fact that, notwithstanding your promise,
implied in paragraph 2 of your letter No. 85, of March 22, 1895,
I hare so far received none of the official copies of evidence,
charge, and proceedings requested in my letter No. 214, of March
21, in the Waller trial, excepting the copy of the judgment of
court, received in your letter of March 24.
Permit me to tender you my thanks for said copy of judgment and
to say that same would have been tendered you ere this but for
the constant expectation I have been under of receiving your
promised remittance of the other documents in the case.
I would especially ask for certified copies of the various
letters used in Mr. Waller’s prosecution.
Regretting the necessity I am under of again troubling you in
this matter, I would ask you, Mr. Commandant, to accept the
assurances of my distinguished consideration, etc.,
[Inclosure 12 in No.
88—Translation.]
Commandant Campion to Mr. Wetter.
Tamatave, April 17, 1895.
No. 43.]
[Division Navale de l’Océan Indien, Le capitaine de
Frégate Campion, Commandant le croiseur le Dupetit, Thouars de ‘leque’ du Chef de Division, a
Monsieur le Consul des Étaos-Unis.]
The chief of the naval squadron having appointed me in the
absence of Commander Kiesel to be until further orders his
delegate on the east coast of Madagascar, I have the honor to
acknowledge receipt of your two letters, Nos. 222 and 223, both
dated on the 16th of April instant.
In your letter No. 222 you ask me to send you Mr. President
Dubreuil’s receipts of your cheque for 4,188.35 francs on the
Comptovi d’Escompte. Those receipts, signed by Mr. Marmier, the
registrar of the court, and legalized by Mr. President Dubreuil,
were handed to Mr. Girandeau in person, your proxy in the
case.
In your letter No. 223 you acknowledge receipt of a copy of the
judgment rendered in the Waller case and ask for a certified
copy of the depositions, accusation, and procedure in same. I
have the honor to inform you that the complete records of that
suit having been dispatched to France, it is impossible for me
to satisfy your request.
In consequence, Mr. Consul, I have the honor to inform you that I
consider that these two letters have received a definite
answer.
Will you accept, etc.,
