Democratic Sentinel, Volume 15, Number 12, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 10 April 1891 — BARON FAVA’S HASTE. [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

BARON FAVA’S HASTE.

HE TRIES TO FORCE UNCLE SAM AND GETS LEFT. Substance or the Correspondence Conducted by secretary Blaine and Italy- a Representatives -Strong Intimation that Fava Has Distorted Messages. Secretary Blaine has furnished to the press the the correspondence with the representatives of the King of Italy. The correspondence consists of two letters—one from Baron Fava to the Secretary of State; the second the renly of the Secretary of Sate, which is addressedcto the Secretary of Legation. The statements of Secretary Blaine, if they are sustained, place the Italian Minister in a very awkward position. The letter of Baron Fava is very curt and peremptory, and betrays to a considerable degree an ignorance of the institutions of this country or a willingness'to Ignore the existing conditions. Two demands are made, both very peremptory in character. They are: That the United States shall guarantee to Italy a speedy trial and conviction of the alleged murderers; that the United States shall recognize the principle of the right of Italy to indemnity for the killing of the Italian subjects. The Italian Minister claims that four of the killed Italians were subjects of the King of Italy. Baron Fava states that the United States refuses to act upon either of these demands, in consequence of which and because his effortshad proved inefficacious, he should leave the United States as soon as possible, leaving the

current business in charge of the Secretary of Legation. Secretary Blaine’s reply is much more courteous, but not less determined. Mr. Blaine is civil enough to state" that Baron Fava’s relations with the State Department for ten years have been marked by courtesy. But Baron Fava forgot his diplomatic manners. His letter read as if it were written in a huff and ihtended to be uncivil. Mr. Blaine directly charges Baron Fava with misrepresentation in.two important particulars. Ip the first .instance, in stating 1 the demands of the government of Italy he has changed the phraseology of the demand of the King as it was reported to the Secretary of State from the cable message by Fava himself. The King of Italy,,according to the cable left with the Secretary of State, insisted on the right of Italy to demand and obtain punishment of the murderers and the indemnity of thp victims as unquestionable. Baron Fava makes the naked demand without qualification or assignment of reason. Moreover, the Secretary of State shows that it would be impossible for the United States, or for any government, to accede to the first demand as to the punishment of the alleged murderers in advance of a trial and a verdict of guilty. Thereupon the Secretary of State gives the Secretary of Legation a lesson in the constitutional law of the United States and of the constitution of Louisiana. Mr. Blaine very curtly says he is unable to see how any Government can give a guarantee that persons accused of crime shall be punished in advance of a jury -trial and a verdict of guilty. The right of trial by jury is granted to the accused both by the Constitution of the United States and by that of the State of Louisiana, and in nearly the same teims. As to the statement of Baron Fava that thd'United States has declined to entertain the second demand as to indemnity; Mr. Blaine flatly ..charges Baron Fava with misrepresentation and raises a question of veracity. Mr. Blaine pertinently adds that he shall regret if Baron Fava has commupicated such a conclusion to the Government of Italy. Mr. Blaine asserts the contrary to be the fact, and says that the United States so far from refusing, has distinctly recognized the principle of indemnity to those Italian subjects who may have been, wronged by the violation of the. treaty of Feb. 2, 1871. Mr. Blaine took occasion to say, however, that the United States has refused to permit herself to be unduly hurried and that while impatience may be natural it does not always secure substantial justice. The letter, to the Secretary of the Italian Legation is of a character which will force the Government of Italy to ascertain from its recent Minister here whether he will rest under the charge of mendacity made against him by the Secretary of State. The fact that Secretary Blaine addessed his last letter to the Marquis Imperialli, Charge d’Affaires, demonstrates that the Government does not regard the rupture of diplomatic 'relations caused by Baron Fava’s recall as complete. Otherwise the communication would have been addressed to the Italian Government direct, or through the medium of,Minister Porter at Romo How the matter is viewed by the Italian Government will be disclosed by the reply that is made to the Secretary’s letter. If the Charge d’Affaires replies as such it will bd an acknowledgment that the Italian Government is still represented in the United States by its legation. But if he announces that he is without authority to reply, it may be taken as an evidence that direct diplomatic relations between the two countries is at an end.

BARON FAVA.