File No. 763.72/7853
The Minister in Panama ( Price) to the Secretary of State
[Received November 24.]
Sir: Amplifying my cablegram of November 7th, 8 p.m.,1 I have the honor to report that on that date the National Assembly of Panama, after the receipt of the message from the President of Panama detailing to them the various steps taken by him in proclaiming a state of war and pledging cooperation with our Government, followed by certain other acts, passed unanimously a resolution approving same. The resolution is as follows:
The National Assembly of Panama, in view of the message that His Excellency the President of the Republic has addressed to this Assembly, under to-day’s date, regarding the state of war in which the nation finds itself with the German Imperial Government since April 7 of this year,
Resolves: That all the Executive acts and measures adopted by the President in connection with the state of war with the German Empire, in which the nation finds itself since April 7, 1917, and of which the President of the Republic informs this Assembly in his message of to-day’s date, are hereby approved.
There was introduced by Señor Dr. Eusebio A. Morales, the Secretary of Government and Justice in the Cabinet of President Valdes, the bill giving the President fuller power for the future, which was predicted by me in my cablegram of November 5, 4 p.m.2
I enclose (enclosures Nos. 1, 2, and 3) clippings from the Panama Morning Journal and the Star and Herald of this city giving an account of the proceedings of the day and containing the text in full of the President’s message, of the resolution copied above, and of the bill referred to.2
As the session of the Assembly approached, Secretary Morales expressed himself as more and more convinced that legislative action along the line of said bill should be taken, and he stated that they had definitely determined to introduce such a measure. After drafting the bill he submitted it to me and I at once made the suggestion to him, after reading it hurriedly, that inasmuch as they had concluded to introduce such a bill it occurred to me that it would be well to have a resolution passed, also, definitely ratifying and approving [Page 375] the acts taken by the President of Panama after the adjournment of the last session of the National Assembly. Secretary Morales replied that they had considered that, but that he feared the fact of the introduction of such a resolution might suggest a questioning by some one of the legal right of the President of Panama to have proclaimed war as he did by his proclamation of April 7 last. I answered that it seemed to me that the resolution would not have the effect of originating such any more than the bill that he had decided to introduce, especially if the resolution came from the Assembly itself and if it were passed unanimously as he stated that he had no reason to think that it would not be. I took occasion to remark that it seemed that nothing else would be advisable to be done, certainly not another formal declaration of war, which really might be the cause of the questioning mentioned. The conclusion was then reached to have the President outline to the Assembly the action taken by him with reference to the war and to have the resolution mentioned passed.
I submitted the bill to a conference to which I asked the Military Commander of the Canal Zone, the Judge Advocate on his staff, and Judge Frank Feuille, Special Attorney for the Canal. Several small amendments to some of the articles were suggested as the result of this conference, all having the effect to broaden the application of the provisions of the articles, and all but one were accepted by Secretary Morales, that one he claiming to be unnecessary because the Spanish interpretation of the provision was broader than the customary English of it and sufficiently so to meet the purpose intended.
Article 47 of the Constitution of Panama, to which the first article of said bill refers, provides that certain individual rights enumerated in prior articles of the Constitution may be temporarily suspended in the case of foreign war or menacing internal disturbances, but provides also that this suspension must be decreed by the National Assembly when it is in session, but when it is not then by the President of the Republic in a decree bearing the signature of all of his secretaries and that the same decree must convoke the National Assembly for the purpose, laying before it the reasons for the suspension. The individual rights specifically set forth in prior articles of the Constitution relate to the right of every person to travel freely within the territory of the Republic; to not be molested in person or in home, except under legal written authority; in default of such authority to have the right of being released on personal petition or on the petition of any other person; to express freely one’s thoughts by speech or writing, by the press, or other means regarding the official acts of a public functionary; to practice any profession or honest occupation without having a degree or being a member of an association, [Page 376] except that certificates may be required to practice medicine or allied professions; and not to be deprived of property except in conformance with law.
As reported in former despatches, we have now pending before the Panaman authorities requests to require the registration and reporting of Germans and subjects of the allies of Germany; to adopt regulations requiring registration and permits on the part of everyone leaving or coming into the ports of Panama and Colon; the adoption of regulations and cooperation with us in the matter of the control of exports and of trading with the enemy; and have already had put into practice a censorship both of cables and of the mails of Panama; and in addition to the internment of Germans from the Republic heretofore effected, it is intended in the next few days to ask for the apprehension and internment of about 20 more German subjects.
The only likelihood of any serious objection to the bill mentioned above is that which may possibly arise against the broadness with which the first article of the bill authorizes the suspension of constitutional guaranties, and this objection if raised will be by the opposition political element growing out of an uneasiness that the administration in power might take advantage of the situation in the Assembly elections of next year.1
I have [etc.]