Page images
PDF
EPUB

relations with the agitators in question, and began again to act as he had done before; and, further, that the books found in his possession were by no means of a “harmless” character. Under the circumstances the Prussian Government has every reason to consider him an objectionable foreigner.

İt is evident that Mikolainis, who remained in the United States merely long enough to become naturalized as a citizen, and who then at once returned to the scene of his former activity, has merely sought to make a convenience of his American nationality. I am, etc.,

AND. D. WHITE.

EXPULSION OF ALBERT AND NATHAN EISEMANN.

Mr. Jackson to Mr. Hay.

No. 1926.)

EMBASSY OF THE UNITED STATES,

Berlin, April 17, 1902. SIR: I have the honor to report that on January 20 the embassy made intervention at the imperial foreign office (F.O., No. 1087) in behalf of the brothers Albert and Nathan Eisemann, to the end that the order expelling them and their families from Frankfort-on-the-Main might be revoked. These brothers were born at Mosbach, Baden, in 1856 and 1859, respectively, and both had emigrated to the United States when about 16 years of age, after having obtained release from their German allegiance. Both became naturalized as American citizens. “Having been very successful as wool merchants, and having become quite wealthy and prosperous, they returned with their families to Frankfort in 1901, expecting to settle there for a few years for the purpose of educating their children.” Two or three months after their arrival they were summoned by the local police and told that they could not remain in Prussia, and the following day (December 14, 1901) a notice was published in the Frankfort Amts-Blatt stating that they and their families had been ordered to leave the country. Upon this they applied to the Regierungs-Präsident at Wiesbaden, the immediate superior of the Frankfort authorities, who suspended the order temporarily, but finally told them they must leave before March 15. They thereupon came to Berlin and presented their case to the ambassador in person. Not only was formal intervention made in their behalf, as stated above, but Mr. White spoke and wrote to both the chancellor of the Empire and the secretary of state for foreign affairs about the matter; and, since the ambassador went on leave, i have brought the question up on several occasions and have urged that a favorable answer be given. In fact, everything possible has been done in behalf of these gentlemen-more than in any other case during the time in which I have been connected with this mission.

To-day, however, I am in receipt of a note from the foreign office stating that the Royal Prussian Government has investigated the case thoroughly, and that, to its regret, it was not in a position to comply with the embassy's wish to have the expulsion order canceled; but, in view of the intervention made by the embassy, the brothers and their families would be permitted, as an exception, to remain in Prussia until the 1st of next October. The foreign office states that the records

show that these brothers emigrated in 1873 and 1876, respectively, shortly before arriving at the age of liability to be called upon to perform military service; that their emigration was obviously for the purpose of evading the performance of such service, and that their father had been especially warned, before the granting of their release from German allegiance, that they would not be permitted to return and sojourn in Prussia.

This information has been communicated to the Messrs. Eisemann through the United States consul-general at Frankfort. I have, etc.,

JOHN B. JACKSON.

Mr. Hay to Mr. White.
[Telegram-Paraphrase.)

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, June 4, 1902. (Mr. Hay states that Mr. Eisemann says he is sure that if the embassy asks for revocation of order of expulsion it will be granted, and directs Mr. White to make the request if, in his opinion, there is any probability of its being granted; that much interest is taken in the case by Senators Lodge and Spooner.)

Mr. Hay to Mr. White.

No. 1347.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, June 5, 1902. Sir: Referring again to Mr. Jackson's No. 1926, of April 17 last, relative to the expulsion of Albert and Nathan Eisemann, I have to inform you that the Messrs. Eisemann feel that the order of expulsion issued in their case, being for police purposes, involves a degrading significance. It is possible that the phrase in the order to which they attach such a meaning may be translated “for reasons of public policy. You are directed to ascertain this point, and, in any event, to endeavor to obtain from the German Government some statement which will relieve the Eisemann's of the possible imputation of any improper conduct on their part, allowing the decree of expulsion, if insisted on by the German Government, to stand, based exclusively upon their alleged evasion of military duty. I am, etc.,

JOHN HAY.

Mr. White to Mr. Hay.

[Telegram.)
EMBASSY OF THE UNITED STATES,

Berlin, June 6, 1902. Have done everything possible in re Eisemanns. Have seen chancellor of the Empire and secretary of state for foreign affairs person. ally, again and again; laid all possible arguments before them, verbal and written, urging revocation of order; never has a case of the kind received more earnest and persistent attention. Thus far we have

only secured extension of permission until October 1. Question of revocation may yet be decided favorably, but probably not. Case is regarded as coming within military policy and rules, which must not be infringed. I believe that Prussian minister of the interior refuses to yield, and that he is securely backed. Evidently much feeling was aroused before the case reached the embassy. Shall continue doing everything which seems advisable, even straining a point as heretofore, if necessary; but any attempt at undue pressure or oversolicitation by this embassy would put us in a position most unfortunate as well as unsuccessful. See Jackson's dispatch, No. 1926.

WHITE.

Mr. White to Mr. Hay.

No. 1966.]

EMBASSY OF THE UNITED STATES,

Berlin, June 6, 1902. Sir: I have the honor to forward to you this day a telegram," a copy of which is appended.

The Eisemann case has been one of especial difficulty and delicacy. These two gentlemen having left Frankfort-on-the-Main shortly before arriving at military age, went to America, and, having been successful at Boston in large business, they returned before reaching middle age with the evident intention of residing for a considerable time at Frankfort. Shortly after their arrival they leased large apartments for a term of several years and furnished them very handsomely. This probably aroused some feeling not only among their German contemporaries, who had done their military service, but doubtless among others in the community, and especially among the military authorities. The order of expulsion was the result.

The next unfortunate phase of the case was that there was a delay by Messrs. Eisemann in bringing it to the knowledge of the embassy and that there was even delay in informing our consul-general at Frankfort. Instead of coming directly to this embassy, in which case we could have taken time by the forelock and probably have secured the necessary order before more feeling was aroused, the Messrs. Eisemann thought it advisable to try other methods, and the result was a great growih of bitterness, more especially among the officials charged with the case. When it reached us here the whole matter had been apparently settled. The military authorities had committed them selves fully and looked on the matter as res adjudicata. I immediately brought the matter to the attention of the foreign office, but found much reluctance to touch it on the ground that it was too late; that the matter was settled, and that the authorities here could not now go behind the decision which had been arrived at and the measures which had been taken in consequence. But the case was pressed both by Mr. Jackson and myself, and as I took a deep interest in it I did what I am always very reluctant to do with an official matter-presented it to the chancellor, both verbally and in writing, and more than once. It was only after mature consideration that I took the risk involved in doing this. Fortunately the minister of foreign affairs did justice to

a Printed, ante.

*

my feeling in the matter, and he as well as the chancellor has been friendly. The same may be said of the acting minister of foreign affairs during Baron von Richthofen's absence, whom I also saw on the subject, furnishing him also with careful memoranda. But it was soon clear to me that the military authorities here as well as at Frankfort and the Prussian minister of the interior had at last been brought into a firm attitude against a complete revocation of the order. The utmost they could be induced to consider was an extension of the permission to sojourn until October 1. More than that, as I gather from my interviews at the foreign office, they have steadily opposed.

The argument presented to me as that of the minister of the interior was, that if the Government yielded in the case of these wealthy men they could have henceforth nothing to say in the case of poor men. In regard to this whole question, every thinking Prussian, indeed erery thinking German, feels deeply.

I mention this to show the feeling which is at the bottom of the attitude taken by German officials on questions of this kind; not to justify, but to explain it. You, of course, are fully aware of these facts; but I doubt whether any person who has not lived here for many years and talked much with men of light and leading in this Empire can understand the real depth of it. When, then, young men just arriving at the military age go to other countries and secure foreign citizenship, which absolves them from all duties to their fatherland, there is a deep prejudice against them, especially if they return to the districts from which they went.

Had the case been presented at once I think that we could have won it, or, if the Messrs. Eisemann had gone to any other part of Germany save the very city from which they went, there would probably have been no question; but unwittingly, on their return to the place from which they had gone, they immediately attracted general attention, aroused envy, and tinally created a strong feeling in the official class that they ought to be expelled. Thus far, nothing, I think, has been omitted by this embassy which could help toward a decision in their favor. Both Mr. Jackson and myself have done all that has been possible. I shall keep close watch of the case and avail myself of every opportunity to make any point in their favor. I may say here that our diffi culty has been increased by the fact that whereas both the brothers insisted for a considerable time that they would remain at Frankfort or nowhere in the German Empire, and whereas one of them later gave me to understand that they would be satisfied if allowed to come to Berlin, which statement I made to the foreign office, urging that a modification of the order be made to this effect, the other brother now comes back to the earlier position and insists that they do not wish to come to Berlin.

I give these facts in order that you may more fully understand the main points in the case as given in Mr. Jackson's dispatch 1926 of April 17. I remain, etc.,

AND. D. WHITE.

Mr. White to Mr. Hay.
[Telegram--Paraphrase.]
EMBASSY OF THE UNITED STATES,

Berlin, June 14, 1902. (Mr. White reports that he has applied in behalf of the Eisemanns for an extension of leave to remain in Frankfort until April, 1903; that the brother at present in Germany declares that they will then be ready to return to Boston.

Mr. White has stated very fully to the foreign office the reasons for this request.)

Mr. Hill to Mr. White.

No. 1358.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, June 26, 1902. Sir: Your No. 1966 of the 6th instant, relative to the case of the expulsion of Nathan and Albert Eisemann, has been received, and the manner in which you endeavored to obtain a revocation of the order expelling them has the Department's approval. I am, etc.,

DAVID J. HILL,

Acting Secretary.

Mr. Jackson to Mr. Ilay. No. 1998.]

EMBASSY OF THE UNITED STATES,

Berlin, July 5, 1902. Sir: Referring to previous correspondence, I have the honor to inform you that a note has just been received from the German foreign office in which it is stated that permission is granted the Eisemann brothers to remain in Frankfort-on-the-Main until the 1st of next April. I have, etc.,

JOHN B. JACKSON.

Mr. Hay to Mr. White.

No. 1369.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, July 17, 1902. Sır: Referring to my No. 1358, of the 26th ultimo, relative to the expulsion of the Messrs. Eisemann, I inclose copy of a letter from Senator Lodge, asking that the objectionable phrase " for police reasons" be stricken out of the order expelling them from Germany.

If that phrase could be eliminated so that it would not appear as if the Messrs. Eisemann were criminals and were on that account expelled from the country, it would be much appreciated. etc.,

John Hay.

I am,

(Inclosure.)

Mr. Lodge to Mr. Hay. Personal.]

UNITED STATES SENATE,

Nahant, Mass., July 11, 1902. Dear Mr. Hay: In regard to the matter of the Eisemanns, I believe they are to have an extension until April, but what they are most anxious about is to have the statement in the edict expelling them, that they were expelled "for police reasons,' removed. They want to get rid of that “police reasons. Is it not possible to have this done? It seems to me it is not unreasonable. We can not, of course, interfere with their removal from German territory if the German Government so decides, but I should think we might have them relieved from that objectionable clause. 1 should be very much obliged if anything could be done in regard to it. Very sincerely, yours,

H. C. LODGE.

« PreviousContinue »