No. 6.]

HAITI.

EXPULSION OF FOREIGNERS.

Minister Furniss to the Secretary of State.

[Extracts.]

AMERICAN LEGATION, Port au Prince, February 2, 1906. SIR: I have to inform you that I have it on good authority that at the meeting of the Haitian cabinet on the 22d instant a list consisting of twenty-five names was submitted for discussion, with a view to expulsion of the parties from Haitian territory. The list, which contained only names of foreigners, had many of of prominence, including one who is a very large holder of itian securities. At the meeting mentioned final action was taken upon five, who, in accord with the decree dated the 22d and published in Le Moniteur, the official paper, on the 24th, must leave Haitian territory by the first available boat.

I have made inquiries and have gathered the following information relative to the parties who are ordered to leave:

Paul Sinai, French; has lived in Haiti some years, and was dealer in provisions until about four years ago.

Ŵ. Katsch, Austrian; has lived in Haiti some years. Twelve years ago was photographer in Port au Prince.

Herrmann Breneke, German; at one time German consular agent at Jeremie.

G. Marchard, French; for some years clerk in National Bank of Haiti.

Tomei, French; formerly of Port de Paix.

The French, German, and Austrian representatives have used every endeavor to delay the expulsion, but to the moment without avail. They have likewise insisted that, since some of the parties are entirely without means, the Haitian Government should supply the same.

They have requested that the different parties be allowed to embark for their respective countries or for points of their own choosing, but this has also been denied by the Government's insisting that they leave by first boat, and that will sail for New York direct tomorrow, and is taking this dispatch.

They also mentioned the fact that our Government requires all aliens to have a fixed sum of money before permitting entrance, and that as some of these parties lack that sum the steamships will be forced to return them. To this no reply was made, as once on board a steamer they will not be allowed to land in Haiti again. It will be for the steamship company to provide ways and means.

So far as I can ascertain, no reason has been assigned by the Haitian Government for its action other than the fact that the parties to be expelled are said to be a menace to the Government.

I have made most careful inquiry as to each of the persons to be expelled. All agree that, while they may have from time to time spoken harshly of this Government, yet, having no following and being of such little importance, any one or all of them could not constitute a menace to any government. Be that as it may, it would seem at least that they should be informed for what reason, real or imaginary, they are to be expelled, instead of hiding behind the vague term of "foreigners who are prejudicial."

In view of the fact that rumor has it that expulsion of the other seventeen of the original list is only held in abeyance until it can be seen what action, if any, the foreign powers will take as to the five now doomed to expulsion, and that the original list contained the name of at least one American, I now respectfully ask the department for instructions in case one of our citizens should be so summarily and arbitrarily dealt with.

I have, etc.,

H. W. FURNISS.

No. 9.]

Minister Furniss to the Secretary of State.

AMERICAN LEGATION,

Port au Prince, February 10, 1906.

SIR: In continuance of my dispatch No. 6, of February 2, 1906, I have to inform the department that the following has been the disposition made of the five foreigners ordered to be deported: Katsch, Austrian, and Breneke, German, had their passages paid to some Colombian port by the Haitian Government, embarking on February 3, 1906, on the German S. S. Alene. In addition thereto the Government gave them a sum of money, amount unknown.

Marchard, Sinai, and Tomei, all French, refused to go to Colombia and were given asylum, on February 3, at the French legation, where they remained until to-day, when the first two embarked on the French steamer for Cuba, and the last named for Santo Domingo city.

Sinai and Tomei refused to accept any passage money from the Haitian Government, and only asked that they be paid their longpending claims, which was refused, while Marchard was given $100 gold for passage and expenses.

I have, etc.,

H. W. FURNISS.

The Secretary of State to Minister Furniss.

No. 11.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, February 24, 1906.

SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your No. 6 of the 2d and your No. 9 of the 10th instant, reporting regarding the expulsion of certain foreigners from Haiti.

You ask what action you should take in case a like treatment should be accorded to an American citizen.

In reply I have to say that, when the antecedent facts and the character of the person ordered to be expelled, so far as known to you, suggest that the expulsion is groundless, you should call on the Haitian Government to show cause why the expulsion should not be set aside, or, if persisted in, why this Government should not press a claim for indemnity.

SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your No. 50, of the 12th ultimo, forwarding the claim of Michael J. Kouri against the Government of Haiti.

The department has read and carefully considered this claim, which is for alleged false imprisonment; for injury to business resulting from such false imprisonment; for injury to his character as a result of prosecution alleged to be unfounded; and injury to property, duly specified in the various documents submitted to this department.

It will be observed that these various claims arise as the direct or indirect consequence of Mr. Kouri's prosecution during the course of 1905 upon the charge of counterfeiting Haitian currency.

Mr. Kouri states, and his statement is borne out by the documents submitted, that he was acquitted on appeal; but a careful examination of the evidence, of the defense, and the judgment of the court of ultimate resort shows clearly that Mr. Kouri was acquitted not because he was wholly innocent of the charge, but solely because the preparations for the commission of the crime of counterfeiting had not proceeded so far as to constitute the crime of counterfeiting.

His codefendants, the Puzo brothers, would seem to have been engaged in the active work of preparation. It was notorious that they were men of questionable antecedents; that they had previously been convicted of counterfeiting, or forgery, and that they had been pardoned. A contract entered into with them by Kouri, in which the Puzo brothers were placed in charge of the Tropical Soap and Candle Company, was, to say the least, indiscreet, inasmuch as it opened up unlimited possibilities to the Puzo brothers, and Mr. Kouri must have known that they were not the men to let an opportunity slip.

The ultimate acquittal of principal or accomplice did not establish the innocence of the various parties; it merely established the fact that the statutory crime of counterfeiting was not completed. The defense, therefore, was technical and is consistent with complicity in the preparation, falling short of the completed crime.

a Not printed on account of its great length.