Mr. Young to Mr. Gresham.

No. 161.]

Sir: I have the honor to inclose herewith the partial answer from the minister of foreign relations of Guatemala to my note to him of November 30, 1894,

It will be seen that there is no mention in this reply of the lashing that was given to Argall while in custody of the officers of the prison, and no mention is made of the refusal of the Government of Guatemala to permit a messenger from the minister of the United States to see the prisoners, that means might be taken for their proper defense. And no mention is made and no explanation is given why bond tendered by the minister of the United States could not be accepted for these innocent men.

I have, etc.,

P. M. B. Young.
[Page 772]
[Inclosure in No. 161.]

Mr. Young to Mr. Munoz.

Sir: I have the honor to call your excellency’s attention to the fact that on the 25th day of August last three citizens of the United States working on the farm of Herbert Van de Putte, near this city, were arrested and placed in the penitentiary. Their names are W. H. Argall, Henry Thomas, and Robert Pardee.

In their complaint to the United States they alleged that they were arrested and taken from their families, placed in the penitentiary, and for twelve days kept in prison without having knowingly violated any law, or having the intention of doing so.

Argall states that he was struck four blows with a rawhide across the back, placing this disgrace upon him as well as inflicting great pain and raising welts upon his back.

These men alleged that they were furnished with no charges, and no warrant was served upon them.

At the time they were arrested they made complaint to me, and I repeatedly offered to the authorities any bond that might be required to insure their appearance at any court, and at any time they might be required, and on the 27th of August I sent a messenger to consult with the prisoners in order to arrange for their defense. This messenger was refused admittance to the interior of the prison, and not permitted to see the prisoners.

Again on the 28th of August I sent the vice-consul-general of the United States with a written request to the minister of foreign relations that I might be allowed to send this officer to converse with the prisoners to arrange for their defense. I have never yet had a reply to this communication.

By the direction of my Government, I have now to ask that your excellency will give me an explanation of the causes of the arrest and imprisonment of the three citizens of the United States on the 25th of August last, and the reason for the castigation of Argall while in the custody of the officers of the prison.

With the renewed assurance of my most distinguished consideration, I am, etc.,

P. M. B. Young.
[Inclosure 2 in No. 161.—Translation.]

Mr. Munoz to Mr. Young.

Excellent Sir: From the department of the interior I have received the following dispatch:

Mr. Secretary of State (foreign relations), present.

Sir: I have the honor to communicate to yon that on the 11th of the present month the president of the supreme court of justice directed tome the following dispatch:

“Acting upon your esteemed dispatch of the 7th of December last, relative to the complaint made by the American citizens W. H, Argall, Henry Thomas, and Robert [Page 773] Pardee, information was asked for from the third judge of the lower court of this department, who answered in the following terms:

“‘Mr. President: In compliance with the original judicial sentence, I have the honor to inform you that on the 25th of August last the jefe político and governor gave notice to this court that Mr. Humberts Vandeputte, Henry Argall, Albert Padillo, Henry Thomas, John de Leon, Abraham Satoj, Gerald Cornado, Dolores Cerrado, Max Diaz, Benito Escoba, and Pioginto Setaj were destroying some buildings belonging to the National Lime Kiln, situated on the road which leads from this city to Chinantla.

“‘Having the charge against them just, they were sent to prison the 28th of the same month. On the same day they were notified of-the decision before indicated, and as they appealed the same, the sentence was sent to the second hall of the court of appeals the 30th, the day appointed for the hearing of the case in reference.

“‘From the above it is to be inferred that the prisoners were notified of the sentence by which they were sent to prison and of further providences; moreover, as the case of Vandeputte reached the court of appeals, that tribunal confirmed the sentence dictated by this court only with respect to Vandeputte (certification of folios, 61). Both the formal sentence of imprisonment and that of liberty of the companions of Vandeputte were communicated to the director of the penitentiary and the depository of the civil register. Vandeputte was let out on bail since the 5th of September, 1894. At the present time the lawsuit is found complete.

“‘S. P. J., Guatemala, 12th of December, 1894.

“‘José M. Escoba.

“And in having the honor to transcribe to you the preceding information, with distinguished consideration and esteem,

“I am, yours, most truly,

Antonio Batres.

It is grateful for me to repeat myself,

Yours, most truly,

Manuel Estade.

And upon transcribing this to your excellency T have the honor to refer to your dispatch of the 30th of November last. Accept, your excellency, the protestations of my high esteem.

Jorge Munoz.