Page:International law and the discriminiations practices by Russia under the Treaty of 1832 (IA internationallaw00kuhn).pdf/7

 tion of the treaty; he simply did not desire to overrule his predecessor. Indeed, he clearly enunciated the choice of principle which was involved, for he says: “The treaty is no doubt open to two possible constructions: the one, that it only assures to British subjects of any particular creed the same privileges as are enjoyed by Russian subjects of the same creed; the other, that the privileges are accorded to all alike without regard to the religious body to which they belong.” (British State Papers, Vol. 73, p. 845.) It has since become apparent that diplomatic considerations induced Great Britain to refrain from insisting on the construction of the treaty which she herself deemed correct.

In striking contrast to the weak position finally taken by the British Government upon this question, prompted probably by considerations of policy and expediency, rather than of international legal justice, was the attitude taken at the same time by the United States with reference to the same contention. The reporter of the British State Papers has included in the report of the correspondence in the Lewisohn case, an abstract of the correspondence passing between our Secretary of State, William M. Evarts, and Minister John W. Foster, in 1880, with reference to the attempted expulsion of Henry Pinkos, an American citizen of Jewish faith. In Mr. Evarts’ letter of June 28, 1880, he said:

“In reply I have to observe that in the presence of this fact, that an American citizen has been ordered to leave Russia on no other ground than that he is the professor of a particular creed, or the holder of certain religious views, it becomes the duty of the Government of the United States, which impartially seeks to protect all its citizens of whatever origin or faith, solemnly, but with all respect to the Government of His Majesty, to protest. As this order of expulsion applies to all foreign Jews, in certain towns or localities, at least, of Russia, it is of course apparent that the same is not directed especially against the government of which Mr. Pinkos is a citizen, and, indeed, the long-