are at peace would call for our earnest remonstrance, whether a treaty existed or not. The friendliness of our relations with foreign nations is emphasized by the treaties we have concluded with them. We have been moved to enter into such international compacts by considerations of mutual benefit and reciprocity, by the same considerations, in short, which have animated the Russian Government from the time of the noble and tolerant declarations of the Empress Catherine in 1784 to those of the ukase of 1860. We have looked to the spirit rather than to the letter of those engagements, and believed that they should be interpreted in the broadest way; and it is, therefore, a source of unfeigned regret to us when a Government, to which we are allied by so many historical ties as to that of Russia, shows a disposition in its dealings with us to take advantage of technicalities, to appeal to the rigid letter and not the reciprocal motive of its international engagements in justification of the expulsion from its territories of peaceable American citizens resorting thither under the good faith of treaties and accused of no wrong-doing or of no violation of the commercial code of the land, but of simple adherence to the faith of their fathers.

"That the two American citizens whose unfortunate cases have brought about this discussion were not definitely expelled from St. Petersburg, but were allotted, by the military authorities, a brief time to arrange their private affairs, said to coincide with the usual time during which any foreigner may remain in the Empire under his original passport, does not alter the matter as it appears to our eyes. The motive alleged remains the same, and the principle involved is one recognized neither by our fundamental laws nor by any of the conventions we have concluded with foreign states.

"It must not be forgotten that this issue, of the banishment of our citizens from a friendly territory by reason of their alleged religion, is a new one in our international relations. From the time when the treaty of 1832 was signed down to within a very recent period, there had been nothing in our relations with Russia to lead to the supposition that our flag did not carry with it equal protection to every American within the dominions of the Empire. Even in questions of citizenship affecting the interests of naturalized citizens of Russian origin, the good disposition of the Imperial Government has been on several occasions shown in a most exemplary manner; and I am sure the actual counselors of His Majesty cannot but contemplate with satisfaction the near approach made in 1874 to the arrangement of negotiations for a treaty of naturalization between the two countries. On that occasion, as will be seen by consulting Mr. Jewell's No. 62, of April 22, 1874, the only remaining obstacle lay in the statute of the Empire touching the conferment and loss of citizenship, of which the examining commission and the consultative council of state recommended the modification in a sense compatible with the modern usage of nations.

"I can readily conceive that statutes bristling with difficulties remain unrepealed in the volumes of the law of Russia as well as of other nations. Even we ourselves have our obsolete "Blue Laws"; and their literal enforcement, if such a thing were possible, might to-day subject a Russian of free-thinking proclivities, in Maryland or Delaware, to the penalty of having his tongue bored through with a red-hot iron for blasphemy. Happily the spirit of progress is of higher authority than the letter of outworn laws; and statutory enactments are not so inelastic but that they relax and change with the general advancement of peoples in the path of tolerance.

"The simple fact that thousands of Israelites to-day pursue their callings unmolested in St. Petersburg, under the shadow of ancient proscriptive laws, is in itself an eloquent testimony to the principle of progress. And so, too, in Spain, where the persecution and expulsion of the Jews is one of the most notable and deplorable facts in history, and where the edicts of the earlier sovereigns remain unrepealed, we see today an offer of protection and assured right of domicile made to the Israelites of every race.

"I leave out of consideration in the present instruction the question whether the citizens or subjects of other nations are more or less favored than our own in this regard. I have not, however, failed to notice the statement made to you by Mr. de Giers, in one of your reported conversations with him, that German and Austrian Jews are subjected to the proscriptions in question, and the implication therefrom that if the Governments of Germany and Austria do not complain, there is no reason why we should.

"It is not for me to examine or conjecture the reciprocal motives of policy or of international convention which may govern in these instances. Neither have I failed to remark the seeming uncertainty with which the British Government has approached the case of the English Israelite, Mr. Lewisohn, who was recently required to quit St. Petersburg, notwithstanding that the personal guarantees of the Anglo-Russian treaty of January 12, 1859, in its eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth articles, are more particular than in our own treaty, and were, presumably, like our own stipulations, framed with the intent of securing impartial rights and protection in Russia. I am perfectly willing to rest my argument on the moral weight of our treaty of 1832, although of course not averse to availing myself of any support which may come from any other quarter to fortify what we conceive to have been our clear purpose in executing that instrument. And under no circumstances would I in the name of this Government be willing to accept a less measure of impartial privilege for a citizen of the United States visiting or sojourning in Russian territory than is assured to aliens in the like case by any stipulation with or usage toward any other nation on the part of Russia.

"I had the honor in my letter of the 20th ultimo to Mr. Bartholomei

to acquaint him with the general views of the President in relation to this matter.

"I cannot better bring this instruction to a close than by repeating and amplifying those views which the President so firmly holds, and which he so anxiously desires to have recognized and responded to by the Russian Government.

"He conceives that the intention of the United States in negotiating and concluding the treaty of December 18, 1832, and the distinct and enlightened reciprocal engagements then entered into with the Government of Russia, give us a moral ground to expect careful attention to our opinions as to its rational interpretation in the broadest and most impartial sense; that he would deeply regret, in view of the gratifying friendliness of the relations of the two countries which he is so desirous to maintain, to find that this large national sentiment fails to control the present issue, or that a narrow and rigid limitation of the construction possible to the treaty stipulations between the two countries is likely to be adhered to; that if, after a frank comparison of the views of the two Governments, in the most amicable spirit and with the most earnest desire to reach a mutually agreeable conclusion the treaty stipulations between the United States and Russia are found insufficient to determine questions of nationality and tolerance of individual faith, or to secure to American citizens in Russia the treatment which Russians receive in the United States, it is simply due to the good relations of the two countries that these stipulations should be made sufficient in these regards; and that we can look for no clearer evidence of the good will which Russia professes toward us than a frank declaration of her readiness to come to a distinct agreement with us on these points, in an earnest and generous spirit.

"I have observed that in your conferences on this subject heretofore with the minister for foreign affairs, as reported in your dispatches, you have on some occasions given discreet expression to the feelings of sympathy and gratification with which this Government and people regard any steps taken in foreign countries in the direction of a liberal tolerance analogous to that which forms the fundamental principle of our national existence. Such expressions were natural on your part, and reflected a sentiment which we all feel. But in making the President's views known to the minister I desire that you will carefully subordinate such sentiments to the simple consideration of what is conscientiously believed to be due to our citizens in foreign lands. You will distinctly impress upon him that, regardful of the sovereignty of Russia, we do not submit any suggestions touching the laws and customs of the Empire except where those laws and customs conflict with and destroy the rights of American citizens as secured by treaty obligations.

"You can further advise him that we can make no new treaty with Russia, nor accept any construction of our existing treaty, which shall discriminate against any class of American citizens on account of their religious faith.

261

"I cannot but feel assured that this earnest presentation of the views of this Government will accord with the sense of justice and equity of that of Russia, and that the questions at issue will soon find their natu ral solution in harmony with the noble spirit of tolerance which pervaded the ukase of the Empress Catherine a century ago, and with the statesmanlike declaration of the principle of reciprocity found in the later decree of the Czar Alexander II in 1860.

"You may read this dispatch to the minister for foreign affairs, and should he desire a copy, you will give it to him."

Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to Mr. Foster, July 29, 1881; MSS. Inst., Russia; For.
Rel.,1881.

As to intervention in behalf of "Mortara Boy," see supra, § 52.

"I am well aware that the domestic enactments of a state toward its own subjects are not generally regarded as a fit matter for the intervention of another independent power; but when such enactments directly affect the liberty and property of foreigners who resort to a country under the supposed guarantee of treaties framed for the most liberal endswhen the conscience of an alien owing no allegiance whatever to the local sovereignty is brought under the harsh yoke of bigotry or preju dice which bows the necks of the natives, and when enlightened appeals made to humanity, to the principles of just reciprocity, and to the advancing spirit of the age in behalf of tolerance are met with intimations of a purpose to still further burden the unhappy sufferers, and so to necessarily increase the disability of foreigners of like creed resorting to Russia, it becomes in a high sense a moral duty to our own citizens and to the doctrine of religious freedom we so strongly uphold to seek proper protection for those citizens and tolerance for their creed in foreign lands, even at the risk of criticism of the municipal laws of other states.

"It cannot but be inexpressibly painful to the enlightened statesmen of Great Britain, as well as of America, to see a discarded prejudice of the dark ages gravely revived at this day-to witness an attempt to base the policy of a great and sovereign state on the mistaken theory that thrift is a crime, of which the unthrifty are the innocent victims, and that discontent and disaffection are to be diminished by increasing the causes from which they arise."

Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to Mr. Lowell, Nov. 22, 1881; MSS. Inst., Great
Britain.

"The prejudice of race and creed having in our day given way to the claims of our common humanity, the people of the United States have heard, with great regret, the stories of the sufferings of the Jews in Russia. It may be that the accounts in the newspapers are exaggerated, and the same may be true of some private reports. Making, however, due allowance for misrepresentations, it can scarcely be doubted that much has been done which a humane and just person must condemn.

"The President, of course, feels that the Government of the Emperor should not be held morally responsible for acts which it considers. wrong, but which it may be powerless to prevent.

"If that be true of this case, it would be worse than useless for me to direct you, as the representative of the United States, to give official expression to the feeling which this treatment of the Jews calls forth in this country. Should, however, the attitude of the Russian Government be different, and should you be of the opinion that a more vigorous effort might be put forth for the prevention of this great wrong, you will, if a favorable opportunity offers, state, with all proper deference, that the feeling of friendship which the United States entertains for Russia prompts this Government to express the hope that the Imperial Government will find means to cause the persecution of these unfortunate fellow-beings to cease.

"This instruction devolves a delicate duty upon you, and a wide dis cretion is given you in its execution. However much this Republic may disapprove of affairs in other nationalities, it does not conceive that it is its right or province officiously and offensively to intermeddle. If, however, it should come to your knowledge that any citizens of the United States are made victims of the persecution, you will feel it your duty to omit no effort to protect them, and to report such cases to this Department."

Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Hoffman, Ap. 15, 1882; MSS. Inst., Russia; For. Rel., 1882.

"I have received a dispatch, No. 429, of the 7th instant, from Mr. Heap, consul-general at Constantinople, in reference to the expulsion from Safed, Palestine, of two American citizens, Louis Lubrowsky and brother, Hebrews by nativity, because of their religious faith. It appears that these brothers on their recent arrival at Safed were required to give bonds in the sum of 400 Turkish pounds to leave the country in ten days or obtain a special license to remain.

"The facts in detail will be found narrated in the correspondence which, it seems, Mr. Heap brought to the attention of Mr. Emmet on the 22d ultimo and 3d instant. For this reason I do not inclose to you a copy of Mr. Heap's dispatch, but you will immediately call upon him for such further particulars as you may desire, should the facts not be fully before your legation.

"This case is commended to your attention as one in which the Department entertains the confidence that you will take the greatest interest and with which you will be competent to deal as a due regard for the rights of American citizens requires.

"It is to be borne in mind, however, that those rights, under treaties, are to be measured in a certain degree by the rights conceded to other foreigners of the most favored nation. You will be careful, therefore, to make no untenable demand as of right. But friendship and inter