As showing the Department’s view respecting Article V of the decree, I
inclose for your information and files copy of an instruction addressed
to the consul of this Government at Buenos Ayres, No. 71, of the 7th
instant. The consul’s duty under the law where an epidemic prevails is
to notify his Government and the vessel leaving port for any place in
the United States, no matter what conditions a foreign government may
impose. He would subject himself to severe reprimand not to do so and
the vessel to a penalty of $5,000 for departing without a bill of
health.
[Inclosure.]
Mr. Cridler to
Mr. Newberry.
Department of State,
Washington, May 7,
1900.
No. 71.]
Sir: The Department is in receipt of a
dispatch from the chargé d’affaires ad interim of the United States
at Buenos Ayres, No. 769, of February 3, 1900, reporting the
attitude of the diplomatic corps in that city respecting the fifth
article of the sanitary decree of the Argentine Republic, dated
January 24, 1900.
That article runs as follows:
“Until an official declaration has been made of the existence of an
exotic disease in Argentine territory, no national or provincial
functionary, nor any foreign agent accredited to the National
Government, may affirm in any document the existence of such
disease, whatever may be the data or reports which are thought to
justify the assertion.”
I deem it unnecessary to go further into detail respecting this
decree, since the Department doubts not you are familiar with it. If
not, a copy can be easily obtained and its provisions fully studied.
You may likewise, if necessary, call upon Mr. Jones, at Buenos
Ayres, who will not only be glad to show you a copy in full of his
dispatch, but to render you any service of which he may be capable
in case of necessity.
Copy of this dispatch was forwarded to the Secretary of the Treasury,
with a request for an expression of his views thereon. Mr. Gage’s
letter in reply, of April 28, 1900, remarks as follows:
“I am advised by the Surgeon-General of the Marine-Hospital Service
that the enforcement of the provisions of the act of February 15,
1893, requiring that vessels at any foreign port clearing for any
port or place in the United States shall be required to obtain from
the consular officer of the United States at the port of departure a
bill of health, is very necessary, inasmuch as this bill of health
contains much sanitary information. This law further provides that
the said consular or medical officer is required, before granting
such duplicate bill of health, to be satisfied that the matters and
things therein stated are true. Therefore, a United States consul,
being reasonably well satisfied in his own mind that an epidemic
disease exists at the port to which he is accredited, although not
so notified by the local authorities, he can not, either legally or
conscientiously, state that such disease does not exist and sign the
bill of health to that effect. Hence he must refuse to issue a bill
of health and leave the vessel subject to the penalty of $5,000 on
arrival at a port of the United States without a bill of health.
“The information furnished by the consuls and inscribed upon the bill
of health is usually founded upon unofficial reports received from
the local authorities; but it
[Page 7]
does happen that the local authorities in some ports suppress
information for several weeks, in order to prevent injury to the
commerce of their ports, and it is therefore extremely undesirable
that the consular officers of the United States should be forbidden
to furnish sanitary information other than that officially furnished
them by the local authorities.
“It can not be otherwise than that a consular officer will
occasionally find himself in possession of facts which lead him to
believe or to know that quarantinable disease exists at the port
where he is stationed, and that the authorities are willfully
suppressing information regarding the same, and in such cases it
would be the plain duty of the consul under the law to either state
the facts in the bill of health or refuse to issue the said bill,
which latter alternative would result in damage to the commerce of
the port of departure at least equal to any damage accruing from a
frank statement of sanitary facts.”
It appears from the dispatch of Mr. Jones that the diplomatic body,
through two of its members, is giving the subject of this decree
careful consideration. The Department is accordingly not without
hope that an amicable and friendly understanding may yet be reached,
if not a withdrawal of the obnoxious paragraph cited.
Be this as it may, however, the Department is in receipt of a
telegram of March 10 and a dispatch of March 12, 1900, No. 5, from
the minister of the United States at Buenos Ayres, officially
reporting the appearance of bubonic plague there and stating the
measures adopted to prevent its spread.
Under these circumstances, the Argentine Government being quarantined
against, there would appear to be no reason to apprehend any trouble
from any statement you might report upon the subject; but even so,
your duty is clear under the law of the United States; approved
February 15, 1893, to which Mr. Gage refers.
I am, sir, etc.,
