Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 3, 1901
Mr. Townsend to Mr. Hay.
Brussels , September 13, 1901 .
Sir: Referring to Department’s instructions No. 80 of July 29 last and to my dispatch in reply thereto, No. 96 of August 18 last, [Page 20] I have now the honor to transmit herewith a copy and translation of the reply of the minister for foreign affairs to my request that the case of M. de St. Bris, falsely arrested at Middelkerke, Belgium, might be investigated and that, if the facts proved as represented, due apologies might be offered and reprimand administered by the proper authorities.
The Department will observe that in compliance with my request the minister of foreign affairs has conveyed to me the expressions of regrets of the minister of justice, and furthermore, that the officer or police, who made the arrest in question, was reprimanded by the minister of justice on July 26 last, before my request that such reprimand should be administered reached the ministry of foreign affairs.
I have, etc.,
Mr. de Favereau to Mr. Townsend.
Brussels , September 4, 1901 .
Mr. Minister: By letter of August 11 last, your excellency has kindly brought to my notice “the ill treatment and arbitrary arrest” to which M. de St. Bris has been subjected at Middelkerke on June 7 last.
As soon as I had learned of the incident in question, by means of the newspapers of the time, I had on June 19 last requested my colleague, the minister of justice, to collect immediately official information.
I have the honor to transmit herewith to your excellency copies of the reports of chief of police of Middelkerke and of the attorney-general of the court of appeals at Ghent.
The satisfaction which the Government of the United States to-day solicits has been anticipated by a reprimand which, on July 26 last, my colleague, the minister of justice, caused to be addressed, through the official channel, to the chief of police (Pattyn) on account of the lack of tact and perspicacity which the latter evinced at the time the incident occurred.
Mr. Vanden Heuvel, the minister of justice, moreover requested me to convey to your excellency the regrets which the facts of the case have caused him and which necessitated the steps your excellency has taken.
I avail myself, etc.,
Report of the Attorney-General.
Ghent , July 9, 1901 .
Mr. Minister of Justice: Pursuant to your note of June 12, and returning the inclosures thereof, I have the honor to forward to you copy of the explanations furnished by the chief of police at Middelkerke in reference to the facts brought to notice by the minister of foreign affairs.
The attorney of the king at Furnes esteems that there are reasons to acknowledge the veracity of these explanations; they concord with the report of the policeman, who certifies that no ill treatment has been inflicted on M. de St. Bris. On the other part, the latter has left Middelkerke without making complaint; his present residence is unknown.
One may reproach the chief of police because he penetrated into the apartment of M. de St. Bris, holding a revolver in the hand. It can only be owing to a wrong appreciation of the circumstances and to a lack of judgment that this officer of police thought it necessary to take an attitude which appears unjustifiable.
Report of the Chief of Police.
Middelkerke , June 27, 1901 .
Mr. Attorney of the King: By his letter No. 13933, dated the 18th instant, Mr. Director of the Public Security, has transmitted to me the same article of the same newspaper, requesting also detailed information in reference to the incident therein published. This is exactly what I have answered thereto.
The 7th instant, at 10.30 o’clock a. m., was introduced into my office the named Proot, Remilde, aged 20, living with her parents, who in a few words, which she, in a halting manner, as she was very excited, made known to me that a foreigner had just rented a room at her parents’ house and that some moments before her mother had just noticed the disappearance of all her jewelry. She was unable to furnish more detailed information.
A few minutes later I was at the house of the baker Proot, Henry, from whose wife I received the following statement in Flemish:
“Yesterday evening about half past 8, this person (a man), who is still in that room”—saying this she pointed to the door of the latter—“came to rent the same at 30 francs per month, which sum he paid in advance and for which a receipt was delivered him by my husband. This room is the one my husband and myself still occupied last night. Yesterday evening about 9, when we went to bed, I took off my golden wedding ring, the value of which is 15 francs, and placed it in the drawer of that wardrobe together with my other jewelry, composed of a lady’s watch and chain in gold, worth 150 francs; of a necklace in gold to which was attached a cross of silver adorned with diamonds, worth 100 francs; a pair of earrings in silver adorned with diamonds, worth 150 francs, and also three rings of which two in gold and one in silver adorned with diamonds, the two former worth together 35 francs and the latter 40 francs. I shut the drawer and put the key in my pocket. This morning, at half past 8, this foreigner of yesterday evening, whom I regret to have accepted owing to his uncleanliness, presented himself in view of taking possession of his room from which we had not yet had time to remove the piece of furniture containing the jewelry above referred to. We gave him possession. About half past 9 this man, in whose room the wardrobe was still, came downstairs and went out for one hour. At his return my sons Lewis and Henry, aged 18 and 16, respectively, entered the room of this foreigner who helped them to remove the wardrobe, which was carried to a small room located on the ground floor.
“A few moments later I opened the drawer and noticed that my jewelry, which was inside the drawer in an uncovered cardboard case, had disappeared. I am certain that since 9 o’clock yesterday—when I still saw them—until now, nobody else but this foreigner entered the house.”
Proot, Henry, 52 years old, baker, his daughter Remilde and his sons Lewis and Henry above referred to, being all persons perfectly honorable and all of them testifying most decidedly on the point that nobody else had entered their house; besides, having verified the lock which could not have been opened except by means of a false key, accompanied by Proot, Henry, I entered the room of this foreigner. It was then half past 11 in the morning. The latter was sitting on the wooden floor, busy with warming on a small spirit lamp a small portion of milk to which were added some parcels of breadstuff. Not knowing with whom I might have to deal, I had, on entering the room, a revolver in hand, which, after seeing with whom I had to deal, I instantly replaced it in its scabbard. Having brought to his knowledge the statement of Muyle, Clamence, the wife of Proot, Henry, and on my interpellation this foreigner said:
“My name is de St. Bris, Thomas; I am a literary man, son of Thomas and Xeres Mary, born in 1847 at Onondaga, in the State of New York, North America. I have arrived here yesterday evening from Ostend, where I had arrived the same day coming from Dunkirk. I have not seen any jewelry in this room. The piece of furniture which has been taken out this room sometime ago and which I have helped to bring down stairs I have not seen inside. During the time I have been absent from here I have been to a store which I can indicate, in view of procuring some milk and spirits of wine to prepare my breakfast. My papers are in my luggage.”
This foreigner, dressed like a real beggar and of a repulsing uncleanness, was in possession of such a great deal of old dusty papers that I judged it advisable—as the room which he occupied was so small—to have his baggage transported to the police station. In going out the residence of Proot, to walk over to the communal house (police station) he pointed out to me the store where he had bought the spirits of [Page 22] wine and the milk and, as it was located only a few meters from there, I went in with him. There I was told that he had really been in at the moment indicated, about 9.30, to buy milk and spirits of wine.
I conducted the foreigner to the police station, accompanied by the policeman whom I had sent for by one of the children Proot, and who had arrived at the latter’s house while the baggage of the foreigner was being taken down stairs; this was at 11.30 o’clock.
I telephoned the matter to the parquet (tribunal) of Furnes. Some minutes later Mr. Judge of Instruction Feys, of Furnes, asked for news about the case. This magistrate informed me, while instructing me to continue the investigations, that he would come up to Middelkerke at 1.50 in the afternoon and that I had to keep the foreigner in custody.
At my office and with his consent, Mr. de St. Bris was bodily searched.
In the presence of the policeman I continued the verification of the papers and the investigation of his baggage, when the steam tramway arrived bringing the members of the tribunal, i. e., the judge of instruction, Feys, the aid attorney of the King, De Haene, and the secretary, Huyghe.
At the request of the judge of instruction, I conducted the members of the tribunal to the house where the offense had been committed.
After interrogating the inmates of the house, and especially the wife of Proot, all of them confirming the statements made to me.
Referring to the wardrobe in question, after having carefully examined the book, the judge of instruction instructed me to have the drawer entirely taken out, whereupon I found between the exterior panel and the drawer the jewelry which was claimed had been stolen.
The members of the tribunal, who were then on their route homeward, continued their way without seeing the foreigner.
I, accompanied by the plaintiff, Clemence Muyle, hastened to communicate to St. Bris the news that the jewelry had been found, and while shaking hands with him I expressed to him my regrets.
The wife of Proot acted in the same manner.
The 12th of the present month Mr. Consul of the “United States of North America at Ghent, in view of a letter relating the substance of the newspaper article herewith inclosed, came to Middelkerke for inquiry. The policeman that I had sent for also protested against the false insinuations contained in said letter. The persons at whose house De St. Bris had been purchasing milk and spirits of wine, at whose residence the consul had obtained information, have told me that Mr. Consul had said to them:
“I believe that this man has not full possession of his brains.”
In reference to the slap he claims I had given him, this assertion is as false as is his statement that an ovation was made him by the inhabitants of Middelkerke.
When entering the town hall he was entirely alone with the policeman, who walked near him, without holding him. Nobody would have supposed that he was being conducted there. During that time I was watching the transportation of his baggage which, at my request, was brought in by the son of Proot.
Leaving the town hall, at about 2.30 p. m., nobody was standing there.
Vandeworen, Hubert, a mason residing in the commune, who at my request has effected the transportation of St. Bris’s baggage to the Tourists’ Hotel and who was then just passing by, can certify to this. The named Schefer, Adolphe, the keeper of the Tourists’ Hotel, at whose house de St. Bris has had his lodgings until Saturday the 15th instant, can tell you much about the habits and manners of this peculiar personage.