It is provided in section 9 of said act

That all the registration and election offices of every description in the Territory of Utah are hereby declared vacant, and each and every duty relating to the regis tration of voters, the conduct of elections, the receiving or rejection of votes, and the canvassing and returning of the same, and the issuing of certificates or other evidence of election in said Territory, shall, until other provision be made by the legislative assembly of said Territory, as is hereinafter by this section provided, be performed, under the existing laws of the United States and of said Territory, by proper persons who shall be appointed to execute such offices and perform such duties by a board of five persons to be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, not more than three of whom shall be members of one political party, and a majority of whom shall be a quorum.

It will be seen that all the registration and election offices of every description in the Territory of Utah are by this act declared vacant, and that the duties of the present officers are devolved upon others to be appointed by the commission of five persons provided for in the act. No appropriation is made for the payment of these officers to be thus appointed.

The laws of the Territory upon the subject of the payment of these officers are somewhat obscure, but it appears that they are county officers, and their compensation is no doubt paid from the treasuries of the counties, and it may be doubted whether the officials of the counties could not, and would not, interpose such obstacles to the payment of the new officers as would render it very difficult, if not impossible, to get proper persons to perform the duties. If for this cause proper persons could not be procured to serve, the purpose of the act would be defeated.

There should be an appropriation for the payment of these officers, and also for the payment of the members of the commission for office rent, and for incidental expenses of the office, including postage. The latter item would necessarily be large, and should not be borne by the commission.

CONGRESS,

CONGRESS,

. Doc

IMPRISONMENT OF THOMAS SHIELDS AND CHARLES WEBER IN MEXICO.

MESSAGE

FROM THE

UNITED STATES,

PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED

IN RESPONSE TO

A resolution of the House of Representatives, transmitting a communication from the Secretary of State in reference to the arrest and imprisonment of Thomas Shields and Charles Weber in Mexico.

APRIL 3, 1882.-Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed.

To the House of Representatives:

I forward herewith, in compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 6th of February ultimo, calling for information in reference to the arrest and imprisonment in Mexico of certain American citizens, a further report from the Secretary of State, and its accompanying paper, concerning the case of Thomas Shields and Charles Weber, to which that resolution refers.

EXECUTIVE MANSION,

Washington, April 3, 1882.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.

To the PRESIDENT:

The Secretary of State, in further response to the resolution of the House of Representatives of February 6 last, touching the imprisonment in Mexico of Thomas Shields and two other American citizens, has now the honor to communicate a copy of a dispatch from the United States minister at the city of Mexico, of the 4th instant, No. 370, detailing the particulars in regard to the arrest and imprisonment of Thomas Shields and Charles Weber, as called for by that resolution.

It will be observed from Mr. Morgan's dispatch that he promptly rendered to Mr. Shields and his companion every possible assistance. FRED'K T. FRELINGHUYSEN.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, April 3, 1882.

CORRESPONDENCE.

No. 229.]

Mr. Davis to Mr. Morgan.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, February 10, 1882.

SIR: It is desired that you will promptly report to the Department, for communication to the House of Representatives in response to its resolution of the 6th instant, a copy of which is herewith inclosed, any known or ascertainable facts concerning the alleged arrest and imprisonment of Thomas Shields and two other American citizens, at Apam, Mexico, for breach of civil contract.

I am, &c.,

J. C. BANCROFT DAVIS,

Acting Secretary.

No. 370.]

Mr. Morgan to Mr. Frelinghuysen.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Mexico, March 4, 1882. (Received March 17.) SIR: I proceed to answer your dispatch No. 229, February 10, 1882, which, with its inclosure (resolution of the House of Representatives, February 6, 1882), I received this morning.

About the 15th January last I received a letter dated "Apam Jail,” January 13, 1882, signed by Thomas Shields, Charles Weber, and Philip Salm, in which it was stated that two of the parties (Shields and Weber) were citizens of the United States; that they were from Pittsburgh; that they had hired to come to Appazaco as glass-blowers for $130 per month, in coin of the United States; that on their arrival in Mexico they were sent to Apam (instead of Appazaco); that there was no furnace built; that they did not commence work until December; that they claimed wages at the rate of $130 per month from 14th July, 1851, to the time they stopped (2d January, 1882); that they had asked for a settlement several times and had been refused; that they had informed their employers they would not work without a settlement; that they left for home, taking the regular train; that, arrived at Vera Cruz, they were arrested upon a charge of having obtained goods under false pretenses; and they asked me to send them a lawyer to defend them. A copy of their letter I inclose.

I had known of these men before. They had called at the legation with the view of obtaining some advice from me with respect to the contract (which I gave them as well as I could), and I know from them that Mr. James Lohse, a citizen of the United States doing business here, had been instrumental in bringing them to Mexico.

On the day I received their letter I sent Mr. Neill to see Mr. Lohse, believing that he could cause the proceedings against them to cease. Mr. Lohse gave him some information with reference to the men, their conduct here, &c., and said he would call at the legation in the afternoon to see me. I waited for him until late in the evening. As he did

not make his appearance I went to his place of business. He was out. I returned the following day. He was again out. I left word for him to call at the legation. He did not come. I then received a telegram from Shields asking for an answer to his letter; whereupon I went to the Palace and had an interview with Señor Mariscal, to whom I read the letter (No. 1), and requested him to have the matter investigated, which he promised to do. In this interview I used such arguments as occurred to me to convince him that the arrest of the men had been made in the interest of private individuals, and that they should not be countenanced. If it occurs to you that I should have written an official note to Señor Mariscal upon the subject, I answer that I had in my recollection a recent correspondence with Señor Mariscal respecting the arrest and im prisonment of Mr. Coffin, in which Señor Mariscal declined to consider his case because Mr. Coffin had not been matriculated at the foreign office. (See my dispatch No. 325, December 28.) I had no reason to believe that Señor Mariscal had changed his views upon that subject. Neither Thomas Shields nor Charles Weber had matriculated, I knew, and I felt certain that Señor Mariscal, if applied to officially, would make the same reply which he did in Coffin's case. My action in the matter would have thus been suspended until I could have reported the case to you and obtained instructions.

Assuming that you would have directed me to demand of the Mexican Government the recognition of these men as citizens of the United States, and an investigation of their case, six weeks at least would have intervened before I could have heard from you, and in the meanwhile the men would have remained in prison. I desired to effect their release, and I deemed I could do so more easily by applying personally to Señor Mariscal than by opening a diplomatic correspondence with him. On the 23d January I received another letter from the parties, in the sense of the first one, a copy whereof I inclose; and on the 26th I received a telegram from them asking for an answer, a copy and transla tion whereof 1 inclose.

On the 26th January I wrote to Mr. Shields. In this letter I stated to him that his case was being investigated in the proper quarter; that I regretted I was not able to send him a lawyer, and I advised him to apply to oue in his neighborhood. A copy of my letter I inclose.

I heard nothing further upon the subject for some time, and had hoped that the matter was at an end, when I was called on by a gentleman here, who informed me that the men were still in prisou. This gentleman suggested to me that if a boud could be furnished they would be released, and that they could find employment in a company in which he was interested. I was not able to furnish the bond required, but I naturally suggested to him that his company should furnish the bond, a suggestion which did not seem to accord with his views. He left with me a slip taken from the Pittsburgh Dispatch, which contains Mr. Shields's letter, upon which I suppose the resolution was introduced into the House of Representatives. This slip I inclose.

In this letter he says, "We wrote to Minister Morgan and got no answer." You will observe that his letter to the Dispatch is dated 16th January, while his first letter to me is dated the 13th of the same month. Had I answered him on the day it was received it would not have reached him when his letter to the Dispatch was written.

You will observe that there is quite a discrepancy between the two letters in respect of the cause of their arrest. In his letter to the Dispatch, Mr. Shields says "they kidnapped us up here under false pretense; they have trumped up a charge against us for violation of con

tract, when they broke the contract first," and this appears to be the basis of the House resolution. In their letter to me they say "they had us arrested in Vera Cruz on a trumped-up charge of getting goods on false pretenses."

To cause the arrest of a man under a charge of a breach of a contract of labor is one thing, and I suppose is a proceeding little known in civilized countries; but to arrest a man for obtaining goods under false pretense is, I believe, an every-day occurrence throughout the world.

Mr. Shields having stated to me that he had been arrested upon the last-named charge, I had no idea that he had not stated his case as it was. However, I proceeded immediately to Señor Mariscal and showed him the extract from the Dispatch, and urged upon him the necessity of some action. He promised to take it.

On the 2d of this month, not having heard from Señor Mariscal, and having determined to bring the matter before him diplomatically in case they had not been released, I sent an employé of the legation to Apam for the purpose of ascertaining whether the men were still in prison, and in what condition they were. I furnished him with written instructions as to what he was to do when he reached Apam. A copy of these instructions I inclose.

He returned to-day and made his report, a copy of which I inclose. You will see that on his arrival at Apam he proceeded tofthe jail, where he found the men in custody. From them he learned that they had been acquitted of the charge of obtaining goods under false pretenses some time ago; that they had been confined thereon for about a month; that on their release they had again gone to work for their former employers at increased wages, and that they were then in prison charged by the authorities of the place with drunkenness, riotous conduct, and disturbing the peace.

I called on Señor Mariscal this morning, and I asked him whether the matter had been investigated by him; he said it had, and that he would give me the result thereof very shortly. When I receive his communication I will forward it to you. In the meanwhile, I have detailed at length all the circumstances connected with the case within my knowledge, that you may be able to furnish the honorable the House of Representatives with all the information I possess relating to, and which is called for by the resolution of the 6th February. If I have not done so at an earlier date it is because your dispatch in which the resolution was forwarded, while dated on the 10th February, was only received this morning.

I am, &c.,

[Inclosure 1 in No. 370.]

P. H. MORGAN.

Messrs. Shields, Weber, and Salm to Mr. Morgan.

APAM JAIL, January 13, 1882. SIR: We are two American citizens and one German, glass-blowers from Pittsburgh, Pa. We hired for $130 per month in American coin to come to Appazaco to blow, understanding that we were coming to an old established factory and would go to work. Immediately after our arrival, instead of going to the above place they sent us to Apam. There was no furnace built. We did not start to blow until December, nearly five months after we signed the contract. We claim $130 per month from the 14th of July, 1881, up to the time we stopped work, the 2d of January, 1882. We asked for a settlement several times and was refused. We told them that we would not work without a settlement. We started for home, took the regular train. They had us