around for it; that some ten minutes after he had left the stand Mr. Georg was approached by a policeman and charged with having taken the pocketbook of the woman; that Mr. Georg then informed the policeman of his official character as a member of the Swiss legation, and the policeman refrained from further action at that time; that in a few moments the policeman was joined by the man and woman, and the latter insisted that Mr. Georg was guilty, and urged his arrest, whereupon the policeman proposed to arrest him; that Mr. Georg again denied the charge, and again claimed his exemption from arrest on the ground of his official character as a diplomatic officer, but without avail; that Mr. Georg then asked to be taken to the place where the chargé then was, in the same building, that he might be identified, but the policeman refused; that Mr. Georg then requested the policeman to send for him a telegram to the Department of State informing of the facts, but this he also refused; that Mr. Georg then wrote a telegram to the Department of State, giving the facts, and gave it, with 50 cents to pay charges, to a boy to send, but, as the chargé is now informed, it was never received; that Mr. Georg was then taken in a carriage to Annapolis, under guard of the policeman, and brought before the chief officer of police; that he thereupon informed the chief officer of police of his official character, and again protested against the arrest, at the same time declaring his innocence; the police then proposed to search him for the lost pocketbook, against which he again protested, and only submitted to the search under force; the search not discovering the pocketbook in his possession, the chief officer of police proposed to release him, but he demanded before his release that the chief officer of police should draw up a protocol setting forth the facts of the case, which was also refused, and he was thereupon released; that the time of Mr. Georg's confinement, from his first arrest at Bay Ridge until his release at Annapolis at the police station, was about two hours; that Mr. Georg was informed by the police that the name of the woman was but she refused to give her address to Mr. Georg after the chief officer of police had refused to interrogate her for it. Mr. Foster to Mr. Tavel. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 28th ultimo, in relation to the arrest at Bay Ridge, and subsequent search by the police authorities of the State of Maryland, of Dr. Alfred Georg, attaché of your legation. Immediately upon being thus informed of this regretable occurrence, I lost no time in communicating by telegraph with the governor of the State of Maryland, reciting the statements contained in your note, and requesting him to cause a prompt investigation of the affair to be made and the result to be made known to this Department. I stated to the governor my expectation that, if it should be found that any of the authorities of Maryland have disregarded the rights which are assured by the Constitution and laws of the United States to members of foreign legations, prompt measures would be taken to secure their punishment and vindicate the honor of our country. While awaiting the response of the governor to this representation, I take advantage of the occasion to express to you the sincere regrets here felt that any member of a friendly legation should have suffered indignity in contravention of our own municipal law and of the laws of nations and of international hospitality; and, while convinced that the occurrence will be found to have been unintentional and due to ignorance or misunderstanding on the part of the agents concerned therein, I have no doubt that the expression of regret on the part of the authorities of Maryland will be as full and sincere as their efforts to mark their disapprobation of the act and rebuke the offender. Accept, sir, etc., Mr. Foster to Mr. Tavel. JOHN W. FOSTER. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR Referring to the note which you addressed to me on the 28th ultimo, in relation to the arrest at Bay Ridge, Md., of Dr. Albert Georg, attaché of your legation, by a civil officer, on the 27th of July last, and referring also to the acknowledgment of the receipt of that note which I had the honor to make to you on the 1st instant, I have now the pleasure to communicate to you, in copy, the reply of his excellency the governor of the State of Maryland, stating the result of his investigation of the case and his action thereon. You will observe that, recognizing the fact that under an accusation for which there was not the slighest color of excuse, Dr. Georg had been subjected to a gross indignity, his excellency the governor has marked his condemnation thereof to the limit of his executive ability so to do by calling for the prompt dismissal of the officer whose blunder in complying with the excited demand of Mrs. Borde was the occasion of this most deplorable incident, and that the officer in question has been discharged from the service of the sheriff and of the Bay Ridge authorities and will not be reinstated. In making this known to you, and at the same time conveying the profound regrets of his excellency the governor of Maryland for this unfortunate occurrence, and by reason of his inability to offer to Dr. Georg and to your legation any further redress or reparation for the affront to which he has been subjected, I desire to add my own expression on the part of the Government of the United States of no less regret for the wrong, and satisfaction that it has been promptly rebuked so far as lies within the executive competence of the authorities of the State within whose jurisdiction the act was committed. Accept, sir, etc., [Inclosure.] Governor Brown to Mr. Foster. JOHN W. FOSTER. STATE OF MARYLAND, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, DEAR SIR: Immediately upon the receipt of your telegram of the 28th of July ultimo, relating to the recent arrest or Dr. Alfred Georg, an attaché of the Swiss legation, I took the matter in hand and made a thorough personal investigation of the case. The facts are that on the afternoon of July 27 a woman, giving her name as Mrs. Borde, of Baltimore, accused Dr. Georg at Bay Ridge, near Annapolis, of having taken her pocketbook, and calling James E. Lowman, a deputy sheriff specially assigned to duty at that place, insisted that he should arrest him. Mr. Lowman was reluctant at first to do so, but finally upon her declaring her readiness to make a formal charge against him and to go before a justice of the peace at Annapolis to substantiate it, Dr. Georg was taken into custody and driven in a carriage with her and the officer to Annapolis for a hearing of the charge. A hearing was had at once before Justice John B. Flood, and there being no evidence whatever to warrant his arrest, Dr. Georg was promptly released and driven back to Bay Ridge in time to take his train to Washington. In the meantime the pocketbook, with its contents untouched, was found and restored to Mrs. Borde, who, it seems, had mislaid or accidentally dropped it, and under the excitement occasioned by its loss brought this most unfounded accusation against Dr. Georg, without any reason whatever other than that he happened to be near the lunch counter when she discovered her loss. Without going into the details of the case, it is clear that under an accusation for which there was not the slightest color of excuse Dr. Georg has been subjected to a gross indignity. Unfortunately, it is not in my power to mark my condemnation of this indignity by any punishment further than by calling for the prompt dismissal of the officer whose blunder in complying with the excited demand of Mrs. Borde was the occasion of this most deplorable incident. This I have done, and he has been discharged from the service of the sheriff and of the Bay Ridge authorities, and will not be reinstated. I beg that you will make known to Dr. Georg and the Swiss Legation my official action in this matter, and at the same time express to him and them how profoundly I regret the unfortunate occurrence and my inability to offer to him any further redress or reparation for the affront to which he has been subjected. Yours, very respectfully, FRANK BROWN, Governor of Maryland. Mr. Tavel to Mr. Adee. [Translation.] SWISS LEGATION IN THE UNITED STATES, Washington, September 2, 1892. Mr. SECRETARY OF STATE: In acknowledging to his excellency, Mr. John W. Foster, the reception of the note he was pleased to address to me under date of 9th August, ultimo, relative to the arrest at Bay Ridge, Md., of Dr. Alfred Georg, attaché of this legation, I had the honor to inform him that I had transmitted the contents thereof to my Government. I have to-day the pleasure to announce to you that the Swiss Federal Council, after having taken cognizance of the aforesaid note and of the report of his excellency the governor of the State of Maryland, has charged me to state to you that it considered this incident as closed. The Federal Council has observed with lively satisfaction the earnestness and good will displayed by the Government of the United States. in this affair, and which has permitted its prompt termination to the satisfaction of the interested parties without in any way affecting the excellent relations so happily existing between Switzerland and the United States of America. I hasten to avail myself, etc., CHARLES C. TAVEL. Mr. Adee to Mr. Tavel. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 2d instant in relation to the arrest at Bay Ridge, Md., of Dr. Alfred Georg, an attaché of the legation of Switzerland at this capital, and to express the Department's pleasure that the incident, in view of its note of the 9th ultimo, is regarded by the Swiss Federal Council as thus satisfactorily closed. It is also gratifying to add that his excellency the governor of Maryland has been furnished with a copy of your note and thanked for his action in the premises, as you orally requested. Accept, etc., ALVEY A. ADEE. ́No. 263.] TURKEY. Mr. Blaine to Mr. Hirsch. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, December 14, 1891. SIR: The Department's instruction, No. 249, of the 1st October, 1891, related to a question, then recently raised by a note from the Ottoman minister for foreign affairs, concerning the conversion of private dwellings into churches or schools, and in regard to which Mr. MacNutt was in conference with the British ambassador, with a view to the concurrent formulation of a reply. In that instruction, and in view of the circumstances that the public teaching of foreigners in Turkey, and the erection of public places of non-Mohammedan worship are, in many instances, under express permit granted to those ends by the Turkish authorities, the Department commented upon the obvious distinction between public teaching and worship in edifices distinctly intended to serve as schools or churches, and the employment of private dwellings for those purposes. The ob ject of that instruction was to simplify the discussion of the question of so-called "conversion" of private dwellings into public schools or churches, by showing that a well-marked line of demarcation between the two classes of foreign rights existed, and that the real issues involved should not be confused by any attempted interference with longestablished and fully-recognized rights of foreigners in the matter of household teaching and worship, on the ground that they had become merged in other public rights of foreigners in Turkish dominions, although equally long established and recognized. Domestic and public teaching and worship by foreigners are alike rightful, and their rights in regard to each are to be alike insisted upon; yet it may be deemed convenient to distinguish between the domestic and the public exercise of those rights, especially as the Turkish authorities appear disposed to base a new system of interference with both classes of rights, by extending the definition of public teaching and worship so as to invade the domain of private domicile. Mr. MacNutt has not yet replied to that instruction, and the Department is consequently unaware what may have been its effect upon the concurrent action of the British embassy and the United States legation. The subject, in its more general aspects, is so important, that I deem it proper to supplement the instruction of October 1, 1891, with fuller and broader considerations applicable to the whole ground of controversy. By reference to the correspondence exchanged with your legation in the latter part of 1886 and the early part of 1887, it will be seen that the subject of the rights of foreigners to teach and worship in the dominions of Turkey without interference or molestation was distinctly asserted and as distinctly recognized. Mr. Bayard's instruction, No. 7, to Mr. Strauss, under date of April 20, 1887, ably presents the unimpeachable grounds upon which this Government successfully rested its |