File No. 312.112 R56/9.
The Acting Secretary of State to the American Ambassador.
Washington, March 14, 1912.
Sir: The Department has received your No. 1247 of the 2nd ultimo, transmitting a copy of a letter addressed by you to the Consul General at Mexico City in regard to the protection of Mr. G. P. Robinson, in which you indicate the attitude of your Embassy toward requests for protection by American citizens in districts in which the Mexican Government has declared martial law.
The Department notes your statement to the Consul General that
Americans in Mexico are entitled under the rules of international law to the same rights and treatment as are accorded by the Government to Mexican citizens, and as the Mexican Government has declared a state of siege in this district it has virtually confessed that it can not afford adequate protection to Mexican citizens.
In this connection your attention is invited to the following statement of the law on this point as it is set forth by Mr. Blaine, Secretary of State, to the American Chargé d’Affaires at your post, in instruction No. 430, dated January 5, 1891:
To sustain this denial of redress Mr. Mariscal has invoked the familiar rule that the measure of protection and of privilege to which foreigners residing in a country are entitled is that which the government of the country accords to its own citizens. As a general proposition, this rule is undoubtedly acceptable; but its applicability is by no means universal. Where the question to be determined is the measure of private rights and remedies under the municipal law, the rule above stated may, with certain well-settled exceptions, readily be adopted. But, where a government asserts that its citizens in a foreign country have not been duly protected, it is not competent for the government of that country to answer that it has not protected its own citizens, and thus to make the failure to perform one duty the excuse for the neglect of another.
It is true that in this way foreigners may enjoy an advantage over the citizens of a country. This, however, is not a matter for foreign governments to consider. They have no power to regulate the relations of another government to its citizens; nevertheless, they are bound to ask that their own may be protected.
(Moore’s Digest, vol. vi, pages 803–804.)
I am [etc.]