File No. 1558/2.
The Secretary of State to the Persian Minister.
Washington, May 23, 1907.
Sir: In your note of November 14 last you are pleased to make, in view of the department’s note of November 7, certain remarks concerning [Page 946] the propositions contained in your former note of October 17 with reference to the Labaree case.
You point out, first, that—
The proposition I had the honor, by order of my Government, to lay before you orally and in writing did not state or imply that the amount of a fine to be imposed could be equal to the sum that has been paid in the final settlement of the case of the murder of the American missionary Labaree, and there is no foundation whatever for such an assumption.
The department can find nowhere in its note of November 7 any statement that could be construed to mean that the amount of the fine to be imposed should be equal to the sum that has been paid as indemnity to Mrs. Labaree. On the contrary, the department’s understanding of the Persian proposition is clearly stated in its note of November 7 to be as follows:
It thus appears that, in view of the impossibility of inflicting bodily punishment, by imprisonment or otherwise, as stipulated by the arrangement reached between the two Governments in settlement of reclamation arising out of the murder of the American citizen Labaree, the Persian Government proposes that in lieu of such bodily punishment of the accessories there be exacted from the guilty parties or their relatives a fine equal to the amount which was remitted from the indemnity paid to the widow of the murdered man.
In other words, it was not intended for the fine to be equal to the sum already paid ($30,000), but that it should be the balance ($20,000) which, in consideration of the Persian Government’s promise to punish the guilty parties, was remitted from the $50,000 claimed.
Secondly, you explain that—
If a few inventive or over-compassionate persons have, without warrant, led the State Department into a belief that the fine would be levied in the guise of taxation or impost of any description on the poor and innocent inhabitants of the country, not only do I most formally contradict them, but I further and expressly refute so erroneous a surmise that is totally inconsistent with the traditional magnanimity of my Government.
The department is glad to have your confirmation of the understanding stated in its note of November 7, that—
This department understands that, under oriental procedure, a fine levied upon the offenders, or upon their property, or upon their immediate relatives is a punitive process implying ascertainment and adjudication of guilt.
The representation which had been made to the department that the burden of such a fine might not in fact fall upon the real culprits, or upon their property or near kinsmen, but be levied upon the inhabitants of the territory by some form of taxation or assessment involving the vicarious suffering of the innocent peasantry for the deeds of public criminals, was merely stated in its note as information which had been received, and what followed was merely a statement of the position of the department in such case. It was in nowise intended to imply the belief that any such procedure was contemplated or even possible. In fact the unwillingness of the United States to entertain such a belief was stated in the department’s note.
There is no issue between us as to the honor and good faith of the Persian Government. These have never been questioned by the Government of the United States, which is pleased to entertain for the Imperial Government sentiments of cordial friendship. There remains for me, therefore, to take notice only of the method of the disposal of the fine which the Government of the Shah has expressed a [Page 947] willingness to exact from the guilty parties. The Government of the United States can not consent that the fine should be used for the benefit of some existing charitable institution where its punitive and deterrent effect would be lost. We must insist that it be devoted to the erection of some permanent structure which, while being of a beneficial character, shall serve as an object lesson. It is our hope that you have long ere this made known to your Government the contents of my note of November 7, and that we shall soon be informed of its readiness to accept some such method of settlement as is therein set out, thus enabling the two Governments to reach a satisfactory agreement terminating this long pending case.
Accept, etc.,