« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
sentenced "in contumacian” by the governments of Prussia and Austria, before he became an American citizen, returned to Germany. He came to Hamburg in 1854, where he was arrested, upon a requisition from the aforesaid governments, but, after some days' imprisonment, he was delivered, November 27, 1854, by the intercession of Mr. Bromberg, United States consul at Hamburg, and the legation of the United States at Berlin. If I had ever entertained any doubt about the propriety of intercession in my case, it must have vanished upon the perusal of this case. I therefore again request you, most honored sir, to intercede in my behalf.
Should you, however, answer this request as you have done the others heretofore, even then I shall not be discouraged in my hope of being one day delivered. I expect assistance from my friends in America, among whom are several men of influence, to whom I have applied, after perceiving that I had no cause to expect much from your inclination to intercede in my behalf, and since you have never told me directly if the Secretary of State has sent you any instructions directly applying to my case. I have at last succeeded in finding out the means by which I can make direct application to the government of the United States, and, upon the receipt of your answer, I shall lose no time in doing so. At the same time, since I am willing to spare neither pains or money in order to be delivered, I shall interest the press of America in my behalf.
These latter details I would not have given you, had you not requested me to write without reserve." I once more request you, sir, to intercede for me. I hope soon, sir, to have occasion to thank you for my deliverance, meanwhile, I remain your very obedient servant,
Mr. Vroom to Mr. Statz.
LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
Berlin, November 29, 1856. Sir: In your late letter of the 10th instant, you decline any application to the favor of the King, because, as you say, you will not acknowledge the lawfulness of the treatment you have received. I can appreciate your feelings, and am not disposed to find fault with the conclusion to which you have come. I suggested that course to you, as the only one which appeared to be open, and I did it reluctantly, and only because you seemed to think ‘me unwilling to do anything whatever in your behalf.
I regret to find from your letter, that you still think I ought to have demanded your release of the Prussian government, on the ground that you were an American citizen. A brief review of what has taken place in reference to your complaint will show, as I hope, that you do me injustice. In October, 1855, you informed me of your situation ; that you left Prussia, your native country, at the age of sixteen years, and went to the United States, where you remained five and a half years, and having been naturalized as an American citizen, you returned to your former home to arrange some family matters, and at the end of about three months, was arrested and placed in the army. I answered your letter immediately. Guided by my general instructions in similar cases, I did not feel warranted to demand your release; and I therefore informed you that, by the law of this country, you were bound to do military service here, and that this obligation rested upon you before you became a citizen of the United States; that you had returned here voluntarily and placed yourself within the power of the law, and that it would be useless for me to make any appeal in your behalf to this government. I stated to you, further, that all I could do was to send a copy of your letter to the Secretary of State, but had no reason to expect that, under such circumstances, the government of the United States would direct me to interfere. This answer was on the 17th October ; on the 23d of the same month, I sent a copy of your complaint to the Secretary of State, and called his attention to it in a dispatch, and also sent a copy of my answer to you.
On the 19th December, 1855, you wrote to me a second time, and stated that you placed your hope on a decision from Washington, and feared I had delayed sending a copy of your former communication to the department. In this letter you undertook to enforce your claim to interference, by alleging that you left Prussia with a regular "passport for one year.” I answered, under date of the 5th January, that I had received no instruction from Washington, and if none should be received, I should conclude my course had been approved. I also stated that your case was not strengthened by the fact of your going away with a passport for a year, as the very terms of it implied a promise that you would return at the end of that period. Both these letters were sent to the government on the 8th January.
On the 15th January, you addressed another note to the legation, in which you beg me to designate the probable time when you may safely conclude that the course pursued has been approved by the Secretary of State, and when you may give up all hope for protection from the government of the United States. On the 21st of the same month I answered that I could give no satisfactory information as to the precise time when instructions might be received, but I was sure that if the department thought it advisable to give any special instruction, it would not long be delayed. On the 22d, (the next day,) I wrote to the Secretary of State, advising him of this correspondence, and sending a copy of it, as I promised you I would do.
On the 15th of July you again wrote, wishing to know if I could give a decisive and satisfactory answer whether you were still to expect any instruction, and, if my answer should be decisive and unfavorable to your hopes, and you should be cut off from all hope of my official assistance, whether my personal influence with the Prussian authorities would not do something for your relief. In my response of the 10th September I stated why I had delayed answering your note, and suggested that an application to the King was the only probable mode of relief. I repeated my persuasion that any demand on my part for your release as an American citizen would be unavailing, as would also be
a på would return atent on the 8th Janther note to the pou may
what hadI could our inquin misundeed
any application that might be made to the military tribunals. It is true I did not in this answer say whether any instructions had been received from the Secretary of State; but, after what had already passed between us, my silence on that point could not have been misunderstood. Nor did I give a “decisive answer" to your inquiry whether any instruction was still to be expected. I could have said nothing in regard to that different from what had already been stated.
I hope this brief statement of what has passed will prove that I have not been unfaithful to your interests or to the duty I owe to the country I represent. I have acted strictly in accordance with what was believed to be the views of my government. My acts have been made known to it, and, in a case involving the personal liberty of the citizen, I am sure it would not have permitted me to remain under a mistake. Unless otherwise directed, I must continue the course I have hitherto pursued; and you must not conclude that, because I have not seen it my duty to comply with your wishes, that I have been indifferent to your situation. Such a conclusion would be both unjust and unkind. If I had known of any mode in which I could have assisted you officially or personally, consistently with my views of propriety, I would have adopted it; and I will most gladly aid you still, if an opportunity shall present.
In your last letter you refer to the case of Haro Haring, who, as you remark, was arrested at Hamburg and liberated through theinterference of Mr. Bromberg, the consul at Hamburg, and of the legation of the United States at Berlin, and, upon the strength of this case, you renew your request to me to interfere. You consider yours to be similar, and calling for the same redress. I regret that in this you are mistaken. Mr. Haring's case is familiar to me. I have before me a letter from Mr. Bromberg, in which he details all the circumstances. From this it appears that Mr. Haring was arrested at Hamburg, not for the violation of the laws of that city, but for the purpose of detaining and delivering him up to some of the German powers, against whose laws it was alleged he had offended. Hamburg, through some of her authorities, claimed the right, as a member of the German Confederation, to arrest him, or at least it was alleged that the German Diet might take offense if he were released. Mr. Bromberg strenuously insisted that, unless Mr. Haring had broken the laws of Hamburg, his arrest and detention were unlawful, and demanded his immediate release. After some hesitation he was discharged. The course of Mr. Bromberg in this matter was highly commendable, and it is due to him to say that the release of Mr. Haring was effected solely by his exertions. The legation at Berlin had no other agency in the matter than to approve his conduct. Unfortunately, your case differs widely from that of Mr. Haring. If you had been arrested in Prussia for the purpose of delivering you over to Austria or Hanover, or some other German State, whose laws you were charged with having broken, your release would have been demanded instantly, and, doubtless, the government here would have yielded to the demand, as was done in Hamburg. But being a native of Prussia, and having left your country and failed to perform your duty according to her laws, you returned voluntarily within her jurisdiction and subjected yourself to the penalty which
those laws prescribed. You will readily see how widely different the two cases are.
You inform me also, in your last letter, that if my answer shall be of a similar character to my former ones, that you will apply directly to the government, as you have found the way in which it may be done. This is your undoubted privilege, and I have not the smallest objection to make against it. I would rather aid you in doing it, and will solicit for your application the most favorable consideration. If I have mistaken my duty, or the views of my government, I shall be most happy to be corrected, and will carefully conform to any direction that may be given me in your behalf. Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
P. D. VROOM.
Mr. Vroom to Mr. Marcy.
(Extract.] No. 148.]
LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
Berlin, January 20, 1857. SIR: I have had the honor to receive your dispatch No. 37, in which reference is made to the case of Mr. John Statz, now in the Prussian army. After receiving it, I prepared a note for Mr. Statz, informing him of its purport, and I now transmit a copy of the note.
I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
P. D. VROOM. Hon. W. L. MARCY,
Secretary of State.
Mr. Vroom to Mr. Statz.
LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
Berlin, January 19, 1857. SIR: A copy of my last letter to you, of the date of the 29th November, and a copy of your note to which it was an answer, were forwarded to the Secretary of State on the 2d of December. Within a few days past, I have received a communication from the Secretary, in which he says that my proceedings in your case are approved; and that if any special instructions had been deemed necessary, they would have been given without delay. It is due to myself, as well as to you, that I should inform you of this immediately, and, in doing it, I must again express to you my regret at the situation in which you are unfortunately placed, and at my inability to relieve you. Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
P. D. VROOM. Mr. STATZ.
Mr. Vroom to Mr. Cass.
[Extract.] No. 163.]
LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,
Berlin, July 14, 1857. SIR: * *
Bonifaz Glahn, alleging himself to be a naturalized citizen of the United States, has recently been apprehended at Weisenfels, in the province of Saxony, and subjected to military service as a Prussian subject. In a letter addressed to the legation, dated the 3d instant, but which was not received until the 9th, he complains of this treatment, and asks for relief and protection. He states that he left Prussia in 1849, at the age of fifteen and a half years, and went to the State of Illinois, where he learned a trade, and was about to commence business for himself, but desired first to visit his parents in Germany. Having become naturalized in the United States, and bearing a passport and certificate of citizenship, he returned to his birth-place after an absence of eight years, and was there immediately apprehended and placed in the ranks.
As this case, however unfortunate it may be for Mr. Glahn, differs in no respect from others that have occurred, and in which the government has declined to interfere, I have advised him that I am not authorized to demand his discharge, for reasons which are fully set forth in my answer to his letter, and that he must not therefore expect any relief from the legation.
I stated, however, that I would send a copy of his complaint to the Department of State, but without any expectation that I would be instructed to take any measures in his behalf.
This being the first case of the kind that I have had occasion to present to your notice, I have thought it advisable to refer to it somewhat in detail, in order that the principle adopted and hitherto acted on might be more distinctly brought to the view of the department.
If I had the least hope that any application for a remission of even part of Mr. Glahn's term of service would meet with favor, I should feel encouraged to make one. But knowing, as I well do, the views and feelings of the Prussian government on this whole subject, I am persuaded that an application, made now, would not only be unavailing, but injuriously affect any effort that may be made for his release at a future time.
A copy of the correspondence with Mr. Glahn, and also of my letter first referred to, are herewith transmitted.
* * I have the honor to be, most respectfully, your obedient servant,
P. D. VROOŃ. Hon. LEWIS Cass,
Secretary of State.