his attention to the fact that he was to leave St. Petersburg only. He answered, howeyer, and justly, that with a business established here, to be ordered to leave St. Petersburg was equivalent, in his case, to being ordered to leave Russia. I do not understand that foreign Jews have been ordered to leave Russia. As I had the honor to state in my No. 205, "foreign Jews have been ordered to leave not only St. Petersburg, but Moscow and some other large towns, where they have hitherto been permitted to reside.” These cities, it will be recollected, are under martial law, as I had the honor to report in my No. 94, of April 23, 1879; and the harsh measures of the expulsion of foreign Jews from them must be looked upon, I fear, as within the legal power and authority of the military governor. With these explanations before you, should you still think that representations should be promptly made to the imperial government in regard to the case of Mr. Pinkos, it will give me pleasure to make them in the admirable language of your dispatch. I am, &c., WICKHAM HOFFMAN. No. 20.] No. 20. Mr. Hoffman to Mr. Evarts. [Extract.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, St. Petersburg, July 21, 1880. (Received August 9.) SIR: Referring to my correspondence with the Department upon the case of Henry Pinkos, an American Jew, ordered out of St. Petersburg, and especially to my No. 208 upon this subject, I have the honor to inform you that the three months' delay granted Pinkos having expired, he sold his little property at a sacrifice and prepared to leave Russia. Having paid his passage and sent his baggage on board a vessel at Cronstadt, he was preparing to embark with his family when he was asked by the police for his passport. He showed them the indorsement ordering him to leave St. Petersburg, which he supposed to be sufficient. They told him that it was not, and sent him and his family back to St. Petersburg to procure the necessary permission. The ship sailed without him, carrying off his baggage. The captain refused to return the passage-money, as he had asked him if his passport was in order, and he found himself with his family penniless in St. Petersburg, and was indebted to private charity for the means to leave the country. This he was to have done yesterday. I was upon the point of addressing to Mr. de Giers a note, remonstrating against the harsh treatment of Pinkos, but have concluded to await your reply to my No. 18 in reference to this case and to the general subject of the expulsion of foreign Jews from St. Petersburg and other large cities. While I feel much indignation at the manner in which this respectable and orderly citizen of the United States has been treated, I am compelled to recollect that he came voluntarily to reside nine months ago in a city then under martial law; and I am further compelled to admit that an order to leave St. Petersburg does not necessarily carry with it permission to leave Russia. Mr. Pinkos's family complained bitterly of the unnecessary harshness with which he had been treated by the police at Cronstadt. SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your dispatches of the 15th and 21st ultimos, in the case of Henry Pinkos, a citizen of the United States, of the Jewish faith, who has been ordered to quit St. Petersburg. In view of the cruel situation in which Mr. Pinkos was placed by the action of the police at Cronstadt I telegraphed you to-day as follows: Dispatch 20 received. Make every proper representation to the government in Pinkos's case that will relieve his situation. I am sure that His Majesty's Government will require no further reasons for the extension to Mr. Pinkos of such facilities for his departure from Russia, and for making good to him, as far as may be possible, the loss of property incident to the action taken by the authorities in his case, than a plain statement of the facts. I am, &c., No. 22. WM. M. EVARTS. No. 23.] Mr. Hoffman to Mr. Evarts. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES. St. Petersburg, August 11, 1880. (Received August 30.) SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your cipher telegram of yesterday, which I deciphered as follows: Dispatch 20 received. Make every proper representation to the government in Pinkos's case that may relieve his situation. Mr. Pinkos left Russia with his family on the 20th July. I did not see him personally, but I inferred from what his wife said that there had been no further police interference with him, but that he had made up his mind that Russia was no place for one of his creed, and that he proposed to establish himself in Liverpool, or return to the United States. As the object of your telegraphic dispatch appears to have been to do everything in your power to relieve Pinkos's situation, and he has left the country, there appears to be no necessity for my communicating with the Russian Government. I shall call Mr. Foster's attention, however, to your telegram immediately upon his return. This may be expected on or shortly before September 1. I am, &c., WICKHAM HOFFMAN No. 27.] No. 23. Mr. Evarts to Mr. Foster. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of Mr. Hoffman's No. 23 of the 11th ultimo in the Pinkos case. Notwithstanding the tenor of your No. 9 and of your note to the Department of July 24 last, as to the inexpediency of presently appealing to the Government of the Czar, in the sense of the instruction of June 28 last, touching the expulsion of citizens of the United States from Russia (or certain cities thereof) by reason of their religious convictions, the statements of Mr. Hoffman's No. 23, of August 11 last, are such that the Government of the United States would seem indifferent to the cause of its citizens in Russia did it neglect to make immediate remonstrance as set forth in said instruction of June 28. Mr. Hoffman's inference from the facts connected with Mr. Pinkos' departure from Russia is that Mr. Pinkos had made up his mind that Russia "was no place for one of his creed." If the meaning of this is that a citizen of the United States has been broken up in his business at St. Petersburg, simply for the reason that he is a Jew rather than a believer in any other creed, then it is certainly time for this government to express itself as set forth in the instruction above mentioned. It should be made clear to the Government of Russia that in the view of this government the religion professed by one of its citizens has no relation whatever to that citizen's right to the protection of the United States, and that in the eye of this government an injury officially dealt to Mr. Pinkos in St. Petersburg on the sole ground that he is a Jew, presents the same aspect that an injury officially done to a citizen of Russia in New York for the reason that he attends any particular church there would to the view of His Majesty's Government. It is evident that the losses incurred by the abandonment of his business in St. Petersburg will afford Mr. Pinkos ground for reclamation, if no other cause can be shown for the official breaking up of his said business than the religious views he entertained. The direct application to have Mr. Pinkos indemnified, however, may be deferred until he shall make it appear what those losses were. I am, &c., No. 24. WM. M. EVARTS. No. 37.] Mr. Foster to Mr. Evarts. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES. St. Petersburg, September 16, 1880. (Received October 6.) SIR: Your several dispatches relating to the expulsion from St. Petersburg of Henry Pinkos, a citizen of the United States of Jewish faith, had been already acknowledged by Mr. Hoffman before my arrival. Mr. Hoffman thought proper to defer action upon your No. 14, of June 28 last, until further instructed after receipt of his dispatch No. 12, of the 20th of July, or till my return. Having examined your instructions, and being informed of the facts of the case, I have felt no hesitation in communicating to Baron Jomini, the acting minister of foreign affairs, the protest of our government against the expulsion of American citizens from Russia, for no other reason than their adherence to the Jewish religion. It will be seen that: in my note upon the subject, of which I inclose a copy herewith, I have adopted the language of your dispatch, and have only enlarged upon that dispatch in referring to the experience had in the United States in admitting the Jews to the full and unrestricted rights of citizens, which I deemed warranted by the tenor of your dispatch No. 2, of April 14 last. The regulation for the expulsion of foreign Jews from St. Petersburg and other cities has been several times enforced against American citizens, in late years, and acquiesced in by my predecessors; but, should such action be attempted in the future, I will not fail to reiterate the protest already made, and seek to prevent the execution of the order. I am, &c., JOHN W. FOSTER. [Inclosure in No. 37.] Mr. Foster to Baron Jomini. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES. EXCELLENCY: The expulsion from this city of Henry Pinkos, a citizen of the United States, with the aggravating circumstances attending it, having been brought to the attention of my government, I have been instructed by the Secretary of State to make known to your excellency the views of my government thereon, and to protest against the treatment which said citizen has received. Although the case has been heretofore brought to the attention of your excellency's department, it may be well to recall the facts attending it. In the month of April last, before I assumed the charge of this legation, Henry Pinkos applied to the consulgeneral of the United States in this capital for relief from an order which he said he had received from the police authorities to leave St. Petersburg, the only reason for his expulsion, as he understood it, being that he was a Jew. He was provided with a passport fully authenticating his American citizenship. The consul-general, upon inquiry, was informed that he was an industrious and quiet tradesman, and with a wife and one child had been residing in this city for some months. In the frequent interviews of the consul-general with the police authorities no charges or intimations were ever made that Pinkos was other than a peaceable and law-abiding resident. The only relief which the consul-general and the chargé d'affaires of this legation could obtain from the police authorities was a suspension for a few days of the order of expulsion, until Mr. Hoffman was able to communicate with the foreign office and obtained through Mr. de Giers permission for Pinkos to remain for three months, to enable him to close up his business At the expiration of this period Pinkos, having sold his little property at a sacrifice, proceeded to obey the order, placed his baggage on board a vessel at Cronstadt, and when preparing to embark with his family he was asked by the police for his passport; whereupon he presented his American passport with which he had entered the country, with the police indorsement upon it ordering him to leave St. Petersburg, which he supposed was sufficient. The police informed him that this was not sufficient, and compelled him and his family to return to St. Petersburg. The captain of the vessel refused to refund him the passage-money paid, and sailed without him, carrying off his luggage. Having obtained from the authorities the permission required by the police finding himself penniless, he was indebted to private charity for the means to leave the country, which he has done in compliance' with the original order referred to above. While the order was in its forin merely an expulsion from St. Petersburg, Mr. Piukos understood it to be virtually an order to leave the empire, in view of the fact that similar measures had been taken in Moscow and other cities, and of the announcement in the public press, that foreign Jews were to be excluded from the country. The Secretary of State instructs me to state to your excellency that in the presence of the fact that an American citizen has been ordered to leave Russia on no other ground than that he is the professor of a particular creed or the holder of certain re ligious views, it becomes the duty of the Government of the United States, which impartially seeks to protect all its citizens, of whatever origin or faith, solemnly, but with all respect to the Government of His Imperial Majesty, to protest. As this order of expulsion is understood to apply to all foreign Jews, in certain cities or localities at least, of Russia, it is of course apparent that the same is not directed specially against the government of which Mr. Pinkos is a citizen, and, indeed, the long-standing amity which has united the interests of Russia with those of the Government of the United States would of itself forbid a remote supposition that such might be the case. Notwithstanding this aspect of the matter, the United States could not fail to look upon the expulsion of one of its citizens from Russia, on the simple ground of his religions ideas or convictions, except as a grievance, akin to that which Russia would doubtless find in the expulsion of one of her own subjects from the United States, on the ground of his attachment to the faith of his fathers. It having been intimated to the Secretary of State by this legation that the reason of this order may be found in the supposed implication of Jews in the plots formed against the life of His Imperial Majesty the Emperor, the Secretary directs me to say that in so far as this may be true the Government of Russia has the entire sympathy of the Government of the United States in all just preventive efforts, and if there existed any good evidence that Mr. Pinkos has been connected with any of these attempts, the Government of the United States could not object to his expulsion on that ground. But neither the police authorities, in the several communications which the members of the consulate-general and this legation have had with them, in their efforts to obtain relief for Mr. Pinkos, nor your excellency's department, in the notes addressed to this legation on the subject, have ever intimated the existence of such a charge. Nor does the character of the citizens of the United States of Jewish faith afford ground for the supposition that they would be likely to engage in conspiracies or plots against the established government of the country. From the foundation of the United States as a nation, they have been entitled to the full and unrestricted privileges of citi-. zens, and bave shown themselves to be peaceable and law-observing in their conduct, quiet and industrious in their habits, and are esteemed a valuable portion of the community, so that in so far as the regulation for the expulsion of foreign Jews from Russia affects American citizens, whatever may be the conduct of their co-religionists of this or other countries, it is an unjust reflection upon American Jews as a class and a discrimination which can not be acquiesced in by my government. As, then, it does not appear that any criminal or improper conduct has been established against Mr. Pinkos, the Secretary confidently submits to his Imperial Majesty's Government, whether in view of the fact that Mr. Pinkos has been interrupted in his peaceful occupations and expelled from Russia on the sole ground that his religious views are of one kind rather than another, he is not justly entitled to make reclamation for the damage and loss to which he has been subjected? In thus presenting, for consideration and appropriate action, the views of my gov ernment upon this important subject, I improve, &c., JOHN W. FOSTER. No. 41.] No. 25. Mr. Foster to Mr. Evarts. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, St. Petersburg, September 28, 1880. (Received Oct. 16.) SIR: I am in receipt of your No. 27, of the 4th instant, relating to the expulsion from St. Petersburg of the Jewish American citizen, Henry Pinkos. You will have noticed by the receipt of my No. 37, of the 16th instant, that I have already executed the instructions contained in your No. 14, of June 28 last, in a manner which I trust will be satisfactory to you. As therein stated, it will be remembered that I was absent from this capital on leave when your No. 14 was received at the legation. My No. 9 was written before the receipt of your No. 14, and related mainly to the inexpediency, or rather inopportunity, of making representations in favor of Russian Jews, and my note of July 24 referred to by you manifests a hearty concurrence in the views and instructions of your No. 14. |