Mr. Merry to Mr. Hay.
Sir: Respectfully requesting reference to your No. 217, dated April 17, I desire to state that before its receipt I had telegraphed from Managua to Mr. Sorsby, at Bluefields, supporting his decision as to refusal to testify before the Torres court-martial. Three days prior to my departure from Bluefields the dispatch reached me, when the matter had already been dropped by General Torres.
Although aware that within the limitations explained in your instruction consular officers might be required to testify before the civil courts of the country to which they are accredited, I arrived at the conclusion that such evidence could not be properly given before a court-martial. The English vice-consul, taking the same ground, appeared, and after giving his name and address, refused to testify without the order of his superior, who has supported him. I was also influenced by the desire to avoid a dangerous precedent. Martial law is often declared in the Spanish-American Republics during the time of peace, as at Bluefields, for political purposes. If these military courts are authorized to demand the presence of our consular officers as witnesses there is no limit to the possibility of abuse resulting therefrom, as no restriction will be placed by them upon the information they will ask for, and the privileged consular information will thus be accessible to them. In the case of Mr. Clancy it was doubly dangerous, because, not understanding Spanish, he would have no means of knowing if his evidence was correctly translated. Instances have occurred recently at Bluefields where the hired Government translator tried to have recorded what the foreign witness had not stated, but, the witness understanding Spanish, he was promptly corrected and reprimanded by the witness. The matter having been practically closed, and no demand made upon me for consular evidence after my arrival at Bluefields, the precedent is now established that before courts-martial in Central America ministers and consular officers need not testify—a position which I respectfully suggest may be of importance hereafter. Had I received your No. 217, dated April 17, in time, I should, of course, have strictly obeyed the instruction.
With assurances, etc.,
United States Minister.