Mr. Breckinridge to
Mr. Olney.
Legation of the United States,
St. Petersburg, November 29,
1895. (Received Dec. 16.)
No. 179.]Sir: Your dispatch No. 138, of the 4th instant,
relating to the case of Mr. Anton Yablkowski and to the question of
expatriation was duly received.
Heretofore it has been thought that it was best to proceed quietly with
cases of this kind in the interest of the unfortunate men, and that the
Russian Government was disposed to deal gently with such as came from
the United States. That was the policy at the time I came to this
legation.
In accordance with this, the legation has always looked for extenuating
circumstances to afford ground for the exercise of the supposed desire
for clemency. The Russian Government also seemed indisposed to squarely
assert its real ground of action.
The foregoing has clearly come to an end on both sides. We see, after
long and varied tests, that the Russian Government is resolute to punish
our people as well as others, and it no longer hesitates to state its
law and avow its policy.
There is no hope, then, for any man guilty as charged except to attack
the principle upon which all such charges are founded.
In accordance with the dispatch now under consideration, and the
foregoing conviction as to the impolicy of further delay, I to-day
addressed a note to Prince Lobanow upon the general question of
expatriation. A copy of this note is inclosed. In that I express the
Government’s desire for a settlement by a convention or some sort of an
agreement. This action is respectfully submitted.
[Page 1109]
In order to complete your record to date upon this subject, which
promises to be a long one, I herewith inclose copies of the following
communications:
Note from Mr. Peirce, while chargé, on October 16, to Prince Lobanow;
reply of Prince Lobanow to that note, dated October 28/November 9, and
addressed to me; letter from Mr. Joseph Rawicz, our consul at Warsaw, of
November 7, and also of November 14.
In his first letter the consul says it is proven that Yablkowski was born
in Russia. That seems to dispose of his claim, as shown in his
application for a passport, that he is a native of Prussia.
In his second letter he makes some suggestions about warning our citizens
subject to this trouble of the difficulties they are likely to
encounter. This, I was verbally informed by Baron Sacken, of the foreign
office, extends to their descendants born abroad, without any limit as
to degree of descent. I warmly approve of the consul’s suggestions as
greatly needed by such persons who may contemplate visiting this
country.
In regard to Prince Lobanow’s note to me in reply to the note of the
chargé, previously referred to, I think his excellency is lacking in
courtesy. I formally acknowledged its receipt, but have made no further
response to it, referring to a previous note from the ministry stating
the case in my note to him to-day.
I have, etc.,
[Inclosure 1 in No.
179.]
Mr. Peirce to
Prince Lobanow.
[The same as inclosure 3 in No. 157, printed on page 1105.]
[Inclosure 2 in No.
179.—Translation.]
Prince Lobanow to
Mr. Breckinridge.
Imperial Ministry of Foreign
Affairs,
October 28/November 9,
1895.
Mr. Minister: I have duly received the note
of October 4/16, in which the legation of the United States desires
to refer to the affair concerning the proceedings commenced against
a certain Yablkowski, for having abandoned Russian nationality
without permission of the Imperial Government
Inasmuch as the legation is kind enough to again precise the argument
formulated in the preceding communication, which it judged had not
been sufficiently correctly reproduced in the ministerial note of
October 3/15, I shall have the honor to answer it, however light and
imperceptible the shade between the two propositions appears to
me.
The legation affirms that the Government of the United States could
not consent to accept as a crime the action of becoming a
naturalized American citizen, in conformity with laws and inside the
sphere of jurisdiction of the United States.
I regret that I am not able to share your manner of seeing, inasmuch
as it concerns a crime committed against Russian law by an
individual who had not been released of his liens of subjection at
the time he
[Page 1110]
embraced
another nationality. He formally violated this law by not seeking
the permission of his Government.
If the administrative authorities of the Empire had been acquainted
with this fact during the time Mr. Yablkowski was abroad he would
have been, according to law, condemned by default to perpetual
banishment. But whereas, in this case, the Russian law would only
have attainted him in fact and in right in this manner, it had to
apply another more rigorous disposition once he returned to his
original country and the infraction was proved.
Having delivered himself to the Russian law for crime committed
against it, which he should not have been ignorant of, the Russian
authorities legitimately arrested him, and he could not escape the
proceedings to which he was liable.
With regard to the visé affixed by the Russian consular authority on
the passport in the possession of Mr. Yablkowski, it does not change
the question in any manner whatever.
As I have already tried to explain in my preceding communication, our
consul-general at Dantzig was unaware that the passport which was
presented to him for visé had been delivered to an individual who
had abandoned Russian subjection without permission. But even if the
antecedents of Yablkowski had been known, our consular authority,
far from refusing Yablkowski the faculty to enter Russia, if he
asked for it, would have been in the right and in the obligation to
deliver him a passport or certificate ad hoc
which placed him in a measure to satisfy on Russian territory the
proceedings to which he was liable under the Russian law.
As to the question as to whether Yablkowski is at liberty to leave
Russia, I beg to refer you to my communication of October 3, No.
8250, in which I have the honor to inform the legation that this
individual is actually in liberty, but as he is under judicial
proceedings in Russia, it therefore naturally results that the local
authorities could not under these circumstances allow him to leave
Russian territory.
In the hope that the foregoing explanation will, Mr. Minister,
convince you of the proper manner of action of our authorities in
these circumstances.
I avail myself, etc.,
[Inclosure 3 in No.
179.]
Mr. Rawicz to Mr.
Peirce.
Consulate of the United States,
Warsaw, November 7, 1895.
Sir: Referring to your last communication,
answered by my letter, No. 1557, of 2d instant, I beg to report to
you the result of the personal investigation by the secretary of the
consulate on the ground, i. e., in the city of Nieszawa.
Anton Yablkowski is answering presently from free port, and the
investigation of his case is led by the examiner in the county seat,
Nieszawa. A. Yablkowski surrendered his United States passport to
the police officer at precinct Buszkowo, and is now living at
Polaiewo Slave, in said precinct.
It was proven that he was born in this country; that he left for
America seven years ago, when 21 years of age, and was therefore
subject to the military service. Said Anton Yablkowski was
naturalized in the United States, and on the 7th day of December,
1894, a United
[Page 1111]
States
passport was issued to him at Washington, bearing the number
18144.
All the papers concerning the case will be forwarded in about three
weeks to the prosecuting attorney at Wloclawek, where he will answer
to the charge of becoming a citizen of the United States without the
permission of this Government, according to section 325 of Code of
Punishment, which is as follows:
Whoever, after leaving this country, shall enter into the
military service in another country without the permission
of this Government, or shall become a citizen of another
country, will, for breaking his allegiance and oath, be
punished “by the loss of all the rights of the Suite and the
expulsion from the country forever, and in case he should
return of his free will to Russia he shall be sent to
Siberia to settle there forever.
I shall watch and report the progress of the proceedings of said
case.
From time to time such cases occur. Those who leave this country
naturalize themselves in the United States, and, not knowing the law
on this subject, and consequently not being aware of the peril,
return for a visit or on business to their old home, where,
according to said section 325 of Code of Punishment, they are
arrested. As they thus place themselves and also the American
authorities here into trouble, I beg leave to suggest that some
publications be made throughout the different States of the Union,
and that by issuing small notices on the subject they may be
attached to each passport issued by the Department of State to each
.Russian-born petitioner, whereby the citizens and the authorities
of the Union will be saved.
Yours, etc.,
Joseph Rawicz,
United States Consul.
[Inclosure 4 in No.
179.]
Mr. Rawicz to Mr.
Peirce.
Consulate of the United States,
Warsaw, November 14, 1895.
Sir: Referring to my communication of the
7th instant, No. 1558, M. C., in re Anton Yablkowski, I have the
honor to report to the United States legation that to-day I have
been again summoned in consular capacity before the examining judge
of the seventh division of the district court of Warsaw, where I had
to answer to the following interrogatories:
- 1.
- By what right was Anton Yablkowski made a citizen of the
United States before being released from the subjection of
this Government?
- 2.
- How long must a man live in the United States to have the
right to become a citizen of the Union?
- 3.
- What forms and formalities are required for the admission
of foreigners to United States citizenship?
To the above I have given the following answers:
- 1.
- Anton Yablkowski became a citizen of the United States by
virtue of the Constitution of the United States.
- 2.
- A foreigner wishing to become a citizen of the United
States must live five years in the Union; in that, two years
in one State and six months in a city, then he will be
entitled to the citizenship of the United States.
- 3.
- A foreigner must first declare his intention to become a
citizen of the United States; then, when he has lived a
sufficient time in the country,
[Page 1112]
he must appear before the open court,
with two witnesses to testify to his integrity, where he
takes the oath of allegiance and promises to support the
Constitution of the United States, after which he is
recorded in the books as a citizen of the Union, with all
rights and privileges, the same as an American born, with
the exception of the right to be a candidate to the chair of
the President of the United States.
Communicating the above to you, I am, etc.,
Joseph Rawicz,
United States Consul.
[Inclosure 5 in No.
179.]
Mr. Breckinridge
to Prince Lobanow.
Legation of the United States,
St. Petersburg, November 17/29, 1895.
Your Excellency: Referring to the
ministerial note of October 3/15, in which this legation was kindly
furnished with the text of the Russian law which applies to
naturalized Americans of Russian origin, I now have the honor to
communicate to you more fully the position and wishes of my
Government in regard to all matters arising under that law.
In the first place, my Government recognizes with sincere regret the
differences which have arisen between it and the Imperial Government
in this connection, and it greatly desires to negotiate some form of
an agreement, creditable alike to both countries and befitting their
traditional friendship, to remove this notable cause of
difference.
Heretofore cases arising under this head have been rare, or they have
assumed other and less objectionable aspects, but the improved means
of transportation, and the steady increase in the United States of
persons of this class, as well as the pending cases, admonish all
that the two Governments will be more definitely and frequently in
contact in this painful particular unless some friendly and suitable
adjustment can be reached.
Our experience with other Governments leads us to hope for a
satisfactory settlement in this instance. At an early stage of our
national existence we held that every sovereign state had an
indefeasible right to prescribe and apply the conditions under which
an alien, being within its territorial jurisdiction, may be admitted
to citizenship, and the legislation of the United States has
proceeded upon this theory. For many years the nations of Europe
generally disputed our claim, and held to the doctrine of perpetual
allegiance. This contention has now been abandoned by all except the
Imperial Government and Turkey; and the Turkish Government does not
go so far as to assert in practice a claim to punish a Turk for
acquiring any other nationality.
To show more precisely the position of my Government, and how
unfortunate must be the effect upon the good relations we are so
anxious to conserve, I beg to inclose herewith a copy of sections
1999, 2000, and 2001 of the Revised Statutes of the United States,
which, of course, are obligatory upon the Executive.
Trusting that these expressions may be received in the very friendly
spirit in which they are offered,
I avail myself, etc.,
