Bassett to L. Ethéart, September 23, 1872

No. 225. Mr. Bassett to Mr. Fish.

Sir: Referring to my dispatches No. 141, of July 27, and No. 146, of the 10th ultimo, both treating of the case of Mr. Charles F. Teel, United States consular agent at Miragoâne, I have the honor to represent that after I had exchanged dispatches with the Haytian minister of foreign affairs, and after I had held several informal conversations with him and his colleagues, on the subject, Mr. Teel was released from custody on the 8th ultimo, after an imprisonment of eighteen days. In my No. 1411 sent inclosed to the Department a copy of my dispatch to the Haytian minister, recounting the circumstances of Mr. Teel’s arrest, and asking, for reasons therein given, that he be immediately and unconditionally released.

Before writing that dispatch I had explained to the minister, verbally, all the facts alleged in the case, and at his intimation and instance I sent him a copy of my dispatch in the French language, with the view of facilitating his early action in regard to the subject. He promptly replied to this dispatch on the 27th of July, in a communication (see Inclosure A) in which he inclosed the reports of the preliminary proceedings in Mr. Teel’s case, and argued that there had been no indignity offered to Mr. Teel, no injustice done to him, and no illegal action taken against him. He also stated that, as the question was then in the hands of the judiciary, it did not belong to the executive to order Mr. Teel’s release before his case should be tried and decided by the courts, and seemed to rely upon the fact that Mr. Teel was engaged in business for a justification of his presumption that the latter’s official character need not enter into the subject. It had appeared to me manifestly improper, particularly in a country like Hayti, to admit the principle that a consular officer of the United States can be at any time arrested and thrust into prison without even the knowledge of his government, and I had therefore notified the minister in my dispatch that if, in future, charges of a criminal character, especially, were made against any consular officer of the United States here, information of that fact should be at once given to this legation.

The request seemed to somewhat surprise the minister, and in his dispatch he asked for an interview to discuss with me this point. Accordingly I called at his office on the morning of the 1st ultimo, and at his suggestion I gave him my views in support of the request. He listened very attentively to my remarks, and took full notes of all that I said. A memorandum of this interview is herewith sent. (See Inclosure B.)

On the following morning I addressed to him another dispatch, (see Inclosure C,) in which I recount the statement that twenty-five thousand gourdes, out of a bag containing one hundred and seventy-five thousand, were declared false, and attempt to show him, by reminding him of the wretched condition of the paper currency of this country and of the common experience of merchants and others here in regard to it, that even if this statement be correct it would form no just basis for the proceedings against Mr. Teel. The minister is also reminded of the apparent illegality of the proceedings taken in the case, and of the lack of consideration seemingly shown in those proceedings for Mr. Teel’s official character, and he is notified that the authorities of his government would be held responsible for all injury which they might in any illegal way inflict upon Mr. Teel.

To this dispatch the minister did not reply until the 8th ultimo. But meantime I saw and discussed with him the case, informally, several times. And I am rather under the impression that, without washing to appear to recede directly from the ground taken in his dispatch of the 27th of July, he had, perhaps, indirectly secured the release of Mr. Teel. At all events, his dispatch is dated on the same day on which the district attorney at Anse-à-Yeau gave a verbal order, which was immediately carried into effect, that Mr. Teel should be set at liberty and all proceedings against him be stopped.

In this dispatch (see inclosure D) the minister argues again in justification of the action of the authorities against Mr. Teel, and labors to show that it was in fact necessary. He admits, however, the common notoriety of my statement as to the unfortunate condition of the paper currency of this country, and even concedes that every person who has on hand large sums in these paper notes runs the risk of having among them bad bills. He declares, however, that Government experts can readily distinguish between the false and the genuine notes—a statement which is at variance with nearly everybody’s experience here, and at variance also with the facts in this very case, as appears from the accompanying inclosure E. Declining to accede to my request for Mr. Teel’s release, and pleading in refutation of my intimation that the proceedings against Mr. Teel were illegal, he declares that the three powers of the state—the executive, the legislative, and the judicial—are independent of one another, and says the only promise he can make me is that the affair will be hurried forward and be kept strictly within the law. Soon after the receipt of this dispatch I learned by a special messenger, sent me from Miragoâne and Anse-à-Yeau, that Mr. Teel had been set free and proceedings against him stopped.

I thought it best, however, to wait a few days, to see whether the minister would himself inform me of the fact. And although the inland post passes between the capital and the other localities of the republic once a week, it was not until I had prepared my dispatch of the 22d ultimo that he disclosed to me his knowledge of Mr. Teel’s release.

This dispatch of the 22d ultimo (see inclosure E) I judged it necessary to write, in order to review the whole case of Mr. Teel, and to maintain the grounds which I had taken in relation thereto in my former dispatches. In it the minister is assured that the Government of the United States recognizes the right of every government to regulate its own internal affairs in its own way, but that every government is nevertheless under the high obligations imposed, as well as the high benefits conferred, by public law, and has a certain right to safeguard the interests of its citizens sojourning or domiciled in other countries.

The dispatch goes at length into the details of Mr. Teel’s case, and an attempt is made to substantiate the statements already advanced, to the effect that the action against Mr. Teel was without justifiable or probable cause, was not in accord with the requirements of Haytian law, and was taken without due regard to Mr. Teel’s official position.

Comment is made upon the three independent powers of the state, and occasion is taken to invite his attention to the great safeguards of personal liberty recognized by our law, especially to the habeas corpus and the right of recognizance or bail.

And he is reminded again that the authorities of his government will be held accountable for all injury illegally inflicted by their action in this case upon Mr. Teel.

The minister has verbally signified to me his desire to make a response to this dispatch. But as in the month which has already passed since it was handed to him I have not received his response, I concluded that I would not longer delay forwarding to the Department the correspondence had on the subject up to this date.

This case seems to me to demand one or two remarks. It is quite generally supposed that this country is full of counterfeit paper-currency, and that these counterfeit notes are introduced largely, if not almost entirely, through persons in the United States.

In both these suppositions I am inclined to believe that there is at least some truth. The penalty which Haytian law attaches to the crime of counterfeiting is death.

But I am assured that this penalty has never yet been put into execution. The extent to which counterfeiting is carried on, and the facility with which persons charged with this crime have always heretofore escaped punishment, seem to have lately aroused the authorities, and they express a determination to pursue to the utmost any and every person found in any way connected with the nefarious business. But in Mr. Teel’s case there are many reasons, most of which will be found at length in the accompanying inclosures, for believing that the proceedings against him were very unjust. No one that knows him could for a moment think him capable of abetting a crime. He is known as an industrious, thoroughly honest, kind-hearted, inoffensive man.

The proceedings against him were universally and justly regarded by the foreign merchants here as a great outrage.

I venture the unqualified assertion that, if his case is to become a precedent, there is not a single foreign merchant in Hayti that may not at any moment be subjected to the same treatment.

Every one felt all the more indignant and astonished at the action of the authorities against Mr. Teel, because there always has been, until the Jastram affair and this case of Teel’s, a remarkable respect, mingled perhaps with a trace of fear, universally entertained for foreign consular officers of every grade in Hayti. Now, Mr. Teel has been unjustly subjected to pecuniary losses and to the humiliation of imprisonment by the authorities of this government.

In any well-established country he might find redress through the legal tribunals. But here an appeal to these tribunals would, in my opinion, be utterly useless in such a case.

In view of all the foregoing statements, I would respectfully request of the Department an instruction as to whether I shall officially ask of this government an indemnity for Mr. Teel. I am, &c.,

Liberty—Equality—Fraternity.

republic of hayti.

On this 22d day of July, 1872, in the sixty-ninth year of independence, at 11 of the clock in the morning—

We, A. Debrosse, major-general commanding the arrondissement of Nippes, assisted by Major-Genera! GhSsy Felix, commanding the commune of Miragoâne, by the assistant magistrate of the same commune, and by other officers of the public force, in the absence of the justice of the peace and of his assistant, assembled in the commercial house of Messieurs C. F. Teel & Company, for the purpose of examining their safes and other objects used for the deposit of funds, as it had come to the knowledge of the authorities that this firm had sent money to the amount of one hundred and seventy-five thousand five hundred and fifty-four dollars, Haytian currency, to Messieurs Emile Sievers &. Co., merchants established at Port au Prince, to purchase drafts, which sum was returned here by the schooner Nereid. Immediately after the landing we effected the seizure of a bag, well sewed up and sealed, containing the aforesaid amount.

In searching, as above stated, the objects that might serve for the deposit of funds, it resulted that, in the aforesaid bag containing one hundred and seventy-five thousand five hundred and fifty-four dollars, we found, after examination, the amount of twenty-five thousand nine hundred and forty dollars to be false bills of the denomination of twenty dollars, which the firm declared to have been received from sundry persons, to wit, first, from Mr. Gédeon Riobé, merchant of this place, ninety-seven thousand dollars; second, from Verdinette, two thousand dollars; third, from Gentil N. Alet, ten thousand dollars; fourth, from P. Devieux, eighty-four thousand dollars; fifth, from Milfort, twelve thousand dollars; sixth, from Bernard, twenty-one thousand dollars; seventh, from Valmers, twenty-four thousand one hundred five dollars; the names of other debtors were also given, which will be furnished, if needed, at the first investigation.

The above amount thus examined is to be expedited to the commissary of the government of this jurisdiction, with the papers relating thereto, in order that the affair may be proceeded with according to law, the arrest of the said Mr. Teel in the meantime being effected.

Of all which we have drawn up the present minute, on the day, month, and year above written, and subscribed our names hereunto.

Liberty—Equality—Fraternity.

republic of hayti.

On this 22d day of July, 1872, at 11 o’clock in the morning—

We, A. Debrosse, major-general commanding the arrondissement of Nippes, assisted by Major-General Glésy Felix, commanding the commune of Miragoâne, and other officers of the public force, in the absence of the justice of the peace and of his assistant, assembled in the commercial house of Gédeon Riobé & Co., the assistant magistrate of the commune being present, for the purpose of examining the safes and other objects used for the deposit of funds, in pursuance of a declaration of C. F. Teel & Co., who asserted that their house had received from Mr. Gédeon Riobé the value of ninety-seven thousand nine hundred fifty-three dollars ($97,953) during the past week, and that the false bills in Mr. Teel’s possession may have come from Mr. Riobe. After having searched the house of the said Gédeon Riobé, we found in his trunk one hundred ten thousand seventy-two dollars (1110,072) in good treasury-bills.

And the said Gédeon Riobé declared that he had delivered the aforesaid some eight days ago, and that the clerk of the house had verified it, and that he had given good bills; hence the false bills in possession of Messrs. Teel & Co. did not come from him.

In witness whereof we have closed the present minute the day, month, and year above written, and subscribed our names to the same.

Memorandum.

B.

In his dispatch relating to the Teel case, dated July 27th ultimo, the Haytian minister of foreign affairs had requested of the American minister an interview, for the purpose of discussing a point raised in the latter’s dispatch of the 25th ultimo, on the same subject, and in response thereto Mr. Bassett called at the bureau of foreign affairs at 10 o’clock forenoon, Thursday, August 1, 1872.

After the customary exchange of courtesies, the Haytian minister, Mr. Ethéart, said he would thank Mr. Bassett if he would amplify and define the exact meaning of the last paragraph in his dispatch of the 25th ultimo, wherein it is stated that if, in future, any consular officer of the United States in Hayti be charged with transgressions of the law of this country, prompt notice of that fact should be sent to the United States legation. Does Mr. Bassett mean that such notification should be thus sent before initial proceedings be taken against these officers, in case they be charged with misdemeanors or crimes? If so, might it not lead to opportunity for the guilty to escape?

Mr. Bassett responded that the request under consideration might be considered in law as one resting upon international courtesy—perhaps privilege. But it was based upon good reason. The law of nations and specific international stipulations, such, for example, as those contained in the consular conventions between the United States and France, between the United States and Italy, recognize special discriminations before the municipal law in favor of consular officers of every grade. The reason for this is that these officers are clothed with a certain representative character. They are charged to safeguard in foreign ports the commercial interests of their country, and sometimes even are authorized to exercise quasi diplomatic functions. The immunities to which they are entitled do not, however, amount to those conferred upon diplomatic representatives. Yet they are of such a character that the municipal law in case of a charge upon probable or other good cause, of misdemeanor, or crime, should be brought to bear upon a consular officer with delicacy and prudence, and with special consideration for the good name of his government, his consular office and dwelling, and his person. The commission that he bears from his own government, and the exequatur that he receives from the government of the country to which he is sent, concur in suggesting the impropriety of snatching him from his official functions and summarily thrusting him into prison, particularly on slight or insufficient cause or suspicion, while he is yet in full possession of these credentials. Each nation might justly be too jealous of its official letters to see willingly one who holds them thus inconsiderately dealt with. In the United States express provision is made by the Constitution for the trial of all cases to which a foreign consular officer is a party. Besides, the United States Government selects with care and deliberation those whom it intrusts with the consular dignity. It is fair to presume that they are men of character, and certainly not likely to be persons capable of willful infringements upon the municipal law of any country. Surely that Government would not desire to continue in its consular service any person against whom serious charges are substantiated. Ought it not, then, to have early knowledge of any such charges? The representative character of the consul, the importance of the interests he is charged to safeguard, due respect for the good name of his Government, the dignity of his office, the presumptions in favor of his uprightness of character, all seem to demand that, in the case supposed, his Government should at least have this early knowledge.

Mr. Bassett also gave special references to the provisions of several consular conventions between the United States and other powers, dwelling particularly upon the one made with France in 1853, and the one with Italy in 1868.

The Haytian minister listened attentively to these remarks, and took fall notes of all that Mr. Bassett said. He asked Mr. Bassett if he could have the opportunity of consulting the volumes to which reference had been made. He was of course told that every facility would he given him in this regard.

Mr. Ethéart, the Haytian minister, having made some allusion to the special case of Mr. Teel, Mr. Bassett said he was well convinced of the insufficiency of the evidence in support of the charges made against that consular officer, and of the injustice done by his summary arrest and imprisonment, and that it seemed to him but just to observe that the Haytian authorities, who are responsible for the proceedings against Mr. Teel, ought to be held accountable for all injury done thereby.

Minister Ethéart observed thoughtfully and hesitatingly that it was not perhaps always easy to insure a faithful and prudent execution of the law in countries like Hayti. He then thanked Mr. Bassett for calling at the bureau of foreign affairs, saying that it was his intention to have called at the United States legation for the interview. Thereupon a few moments of pleasant personal conversation ended the conference.