New York Times 100 years ago today, March 2, 1913:
His Rejoinder to Knox Note Insists That the Issue Is Arbitrable Under Treaty.
DOUBTS PRESIDENT'S POWER
And Contends Arbitration Should Precede, Not Follow, Actual Toll Collecting from British Vessels.
Special to The New York Times.
WASHINGTON, March 1.— Secretary Knox made public to-night the reply of the British Government to his note of Jan. 17, setting forth the argument of this Government against the British protest presented last August in regard to the exemption of United States coasting vessels from the payment of tolls on passing through the Panama Canal. The British reply came through Ambassador Bryce, and points out that it was not practicable to present fully before the Administration leaves office the arguments against Mr. Knox's views on the question at issue. The contention is made that it is entirely feasible to arbitrate the differences between the two Governments under Article I. of the treaty of 1908.
One of the major points in the reply is that while no discrimination against any British vessel has actually been committed yet, the passage by Congress of the act directing the President to fix the canal tolls between certain limits, and declaring that no tolls should be levied on ships engaged in the coastwise trade of the United States, was in itself an act of discrimination inconsistent with the terms of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty, which guaranteed equality of treatment between the vessels of all nations.
The British position, in short, is that the act of Congress, apart from any action that may actually be taken when the canal is open and equal terms are denied a British ship with an American ship engaged in coastwise trade, is a contravention of the treaty that should be made the subject of arbitration. Sir Edward Grey hints strongly that Congress may avoid the necessity of arbitration by reconsidering its action in regard to free tolls for American coastwise shipping. Otherwise, he urges, an arbitral case already exists.
The hope is expressed in the note that there may be an interpretation of the meaning of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty before the occurrence of definite acts of discrimination, and before actual damage be done, which would be sufficient to take the controversy to the House.
In view of the coming of a new administration, which will have to deal with the issue, Secretary Knox will not undertake to answer Mr. Bryce's note. A full memorandum of the case will be prepared and left to his successor for his guidance as to the facts of record. The British note reads:
Text of British Rejoinder.
"His Majesty's Government are unable before the Administration leaves office to reply fully to the arguments contained in your dispatch of the 17th ultimo to the United States Chargé d'Affaires at London regarding the difference of opinion that has arisen between our two Governments as to the interpretation of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty, but they desire me in the meantime to offer the following observations with regard to the argument that no case has yet arisen calling for any submission to arbitration of the points in difference between his Majesty's Government and that of the United States on the interpretation of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty, because no actual injury has as jet resulted to any British interest, and all that has been done so far is to pass an act of Congress under which action held by his Majesty's Government to be prejudicial to British interests might be taken.
"From this view his Majesty's Government feel bound to express their dissent. They conceive that international law or usage does not support the doctrine that the passing of a statute in contravention of a treaty right affords no ground of complaint for the infraction of that right, and that the nation which holds that its treaty rights have been so infringed or brought into question by a denial that they exist must, before protesting and seeking a means of determining the point at issue, wait until some further action violating those rights in a concrete instance has been taken, which in the presence instance would, according to your argument, seem to mean until tolls have been actually levied upon British vessels from which vessels owned by citizens of the United States have been exempted.
Questions President's Power.
"The terms of the proclamation issued by the President fixing the canal tolls and the particular method which your note sets forth as having been adopted by him in his discretion on a given occasion for determining on what basis they should be fixed do not appear to his Majesty's Government to affect the general issue as to the meaning of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty which they have raised. In their view, the act of Congress, when it declared that no tolls should be levied on ships engaged in the coasting trade of the United States, and when in further directing the President to fix those tolls within certain limits it distinguished between vessels of the citizens of the United States and other vessels, was in itself and apart from any action which may be taken under it inconsistent with the provisions of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty for equality of treatment between the vessels of all nations. The exemption referred to appears to his Majesty's Government to conflict with the express words of Rule 1 of Article 3 of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty, and the act gave the President no power to modify or discontinue the exemption.
"In their opinion the mere conferring by Congress of power to fix lower tolls on United States ships than on British ships amounts to a denial of the right of British shipping to equality of treatment, and is therefore inconsistent with the treaty, irrespective of the particular way in which such power has been so far actually exercised.
"In stating thus briefly their view of the compatibility of the act of Congress with their treaty rights, his Majesty's Government hold that the difference which exists between the two Governments is clearly one which falls within the meaning of Article 1 of the arbitration treaty of 1908.
"As respects the suggestion contained in the last paragraph but one of your note under reply, his Majesty's Government conceive that Article 1 of the treaty of 1908 so clearly meets the case that has bow arisen that it is sufficient to put its provisions in force in whatever manner the two Governments may find the most convenient. It is unnecessary to repeat that a reference to arbitration would be rendered superfluous if steps were taken by the United States Government to remove the objections entertained by his Majesty's Government to the act.
"His Majesty's Government have not desired me to argue in this note that the view they take of the main issue — the proper interpretation of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty — is the correct view, but only that a case for the determination of that issue has already arisen and now exists. They conceive that the interest of both countries requires that issue to be settled promptly before the opening of the canal and by means which will leave no ground for regret or complaint. The avoidance of possible friction has been one of the main objects of those methods of arbitration of which the United States has been for so long a foremost and consistent advocate. His Majesty's Government think it more in accordance with the general arbitration treaty that the settlement desired should precede rather than follow the doing of any acts which could raise questions of actual damage suffered; and better, also, that when vessels begin to pass through the great waterway in whose construction all the world has been interested, there should be left subsisting no cause of difference which could prevent any other nation from joining without reserve in the satisfaction the people of the United States will feel at the completion of a work of such grandeur and utility."
Saturday, March 2, 2013
Shell From Mexican Craft.
New York Times 100 years ago today, March 2, 1913:
Fired by Gunboat in Practice — Curiosity Caused Explosion.
Special Cable to The New York Times.
VERA CRUZ, Mex., March 1.— The shell which exploded at La Piedra, near the Town of Alavardo, it has been learned, was not fired by Admiral Fletcher's squadron. Both the military authorities and the American Consul denied absolutely to-day that the shot came from a United States warship. It now appears the shell was from the Mexican gunboat Vera Cruz and was fired in target practice a week ago.
Men near Alavardo found the unexploded shell, and through curiosity examined it with a piece of iron.
Fired by Gunboat in Practice — Curiosity Caused Explosion.
Special Cable to The New York Times.
VERA CRUZ, Mex., March 1.— The shell which exploded at La Piedra, near the Town of Alavardo, it has been learned, was not fired by Admiral Fletcher's squadron. Both the military authorities and the American Consul denied absolutely to-day that the shot came from a United States warship. It now appears the shell was from the Mexican gunboat Vera Cruz and was fired in target practice a week ago.
Men near Alavardo found the unexploded shell, and through curiosity examined it with a piece of iron.
Friday, March 1, 2013
Grey Answers Knox On Tolls Dispute
New York Times 100 years ago today, March 1, 1913:
British Note, Said to Propose Arbitration, Will Pass to New Administration.
WILSON'S VIEWS IN DOUBT
Coming President Denies He Has Finally Expressed Himself on Panama Canal Issue.
WASHINGTON. Feb. 28.— The rejoinder of the British Government to the last American note regarding the Panama Canal tolls question was delivered to-day to Secretary Knox by Ambassador Bryce. Though naturally of great interest to Secretary Knox, he will make no effort to consider it, but will allow the negotiations on the American side to be continued by his successor in office.
It is understood that the British note, after a repetition of former arguments in support of its original contention, contains a flat proposal for arbitration of the issue, according to the provisions of the existing special arbitration treaty between the two countries which will expire in June.
The note was read to Secretary Knox by Ambassador Bryce at the Secretary's office, and a copy was left with Mr. Knox by direction of Sir Edward Grey. It is withheld from publication for the present to afford Secretary Knox an opportunity to lay it before President Taft, but it has been arranged that the note be given out for publication in the Sunday morning papers in this country and the Monday . morning papers in Europe.
The report that President-elect Wilson favors Senator Root's amendment to the Panama Canal bill repealing the provision exempting American coastwise ships from payment of tolls is the subject of remark, because Senator O'Gorman of New York, who has boon regarded as more or less of a spokesman for Mr. Wilson, is a sturdy opponent of the Root amendment and a champion of free passage for American ships.
There is no likelihood of any action upon the Root repeal amendment in the few remaining days of the Sixty-second Congress. It was recently tabled in the Senate Interoceanic Canals Committee, thus preventing the possibility of even being brought before the Senate on a minority report.
It is expected to he revived at the next Congress, probably in the course of the extra session.
LONDON, Feb. 28.— Dispatches from Washington published here, announcing that president-elect Woodrow Wilson had expressed himself in favor of supporting Senator Elihu Root's amendment to the Panama Canal bill repealing the provision exempting American vessels from paying; tolls for passage through the Panama Canal, have given rise to considerable comment in the English newspapers, which voice their gratification over the attitude attributed to him. The Westminster Gazette, a leading organ of the British Government says:
"We all very much regretted to find ourselves in conflict with the United States Government on a point of this kind, and believe that public opinion in the United States will welcome this changed attitude leading to the avoidance of further controversy."
The Pall Mall Gazette says: "Dr. Wilson is to be congratulated on striking a true and high note in this matter upon the eve of his accession. We think repeal of the preemption clause would be far the best solution of a tangle created by the shortsightedness of overreaching politicians."
The publication to-day of the statement that the British Government has proposed arbitration of the canal question in a note to the State Department, coupled with the comment of the British press on dispatches to London newspapers purporting to represent President-elect Wilson as against free tolls, brought no definite statement yesterday from Mr. Wilson.
The President-elect declined to make any comment beyond a denial of the published report that he had expressed himself with finality on the question. Mr. Wilson said that he did not feel it would be proper for him to discuss the matter of canal tolls until after he became President and had had a chance to discuss it with members of the Senate.
The possibility that the Senate might take some action which would remove the grounds for the British protest and thus relieve the new Administration from all embarrassment is cited in some quarters as the chief reason for his reticence.
On the other hand, it is said by those who know in general the President-elect's ideas on foreign policies that if the question is flatly put up to him he either would indicate opposition to the proposed method of granting free tolls to American ships, or favor submission of the question to a court of arbitration.
British Note, Said to Propose Arbitration, Will Pass to New Administration.
WILSON'S VIEWS IN DOUBT
Coming President Denies He Has Finally Expressed Himself on Panama Canal Issue.
WASHINGTON. Feb. 28.— The rejoinder of the British Government to the last American note regarding the Panama Canal tolls question was delivered to-day to Secretary Knox by Ambassador Bryce. Though naturally of great interest to Secretary Knox, he will make no effort to consider it, but will allow the negotiations on the American side to be continued by his successor in office.
It is understood that the British note, after a repetition of former arguments in support of its original contention, contains a flat proposal for arbitration of the issue, according to the provisions of the existing special arbitration treaty between the two countries which will expire in June.
The note was read to Secretary Knox by Ambassador Bryce at the Secretary's office, and a copy was left with Mr. Knox by direction of Sir Edward Grey. It is withheld from publication for the present to afford Secretary Knox an opportunity to lay it before President Taft, but it has been arranged that the note be given out for publication in the Sunday morning papers in this country and the Monday . morning papers in Europe.
The report that President-elect Wilson favors Senator Root's amendment to the Panama Canal bill repealing the provision exempting American coastwise ships from payment of tolls is the subject of remark, because Senator O'Gorman of New York, who has boon regarded as more or less of a spokesman for Mr. Wilson, is a sturdy opponent of the Root amendment and a champion of free passage for American ships.
There is no likelihood of any action upon the Root repeal amendment in the few remaining days of the Sixty-second Congress. It was recently tabled in the Senate Interoceanic Canals Committee, thus preventing the possibility of even being brought before the Senate on a minority report.
It is expected to he revived at the next Congress, probably in the course of the extra session.
LONDON, Feb. 28.— Dispatches from Washington published here, announcing that president-elect Woodrow Wilson had expressed himself in favor of supporting Senator Elihu Root's amendment to the Panama Canal bill repealing the provision exempting American vessels from paying; tolls for passage through the Panama Canal, have given rise to considerable comment in the English newspapers, which voice their gratification over the attitude attributed to him. The Westminster Gazette, a leading organ of the British Government says:
"We all very much regretted to find ourselves in conflict with the United States Government on a point of this kind, and believe that public opinion in the United States will welcome this changed attitude leading to the avoidance of further controversy."
The Pall Mall Gazette says: "Dr. Wilson is to be congratulated on striking a true and high note in this matter upon the eve of his accession. We think repeal of the preemption clause would be far the best solution of a tangle created by the shortsightedness of overreaching politicians."
The publication to-day of the statement that the British Government has proposed arbitration of the canal question in a note to the State Department, coupled with the comment of the British press on dispatches to London newspapers purporting to represent President-elect Wilson as against free tolls, brought no definite statement yesterday from Mr. Wilson.
The President-elect declined to make any comment beyond a denial of the published report that he had expressed himself with finality on the question. Mr. Wilson said that he did not feel it would be proper for him to discuss the matter of canal tolls until after he became President and had had a chance to discuss it with members of the Senate.
The possibility that the Senate might take some action which would remove the grounds for the British protest and thus relieve the new Administration from all embarrassment is cited in some quarters as the chief reason for his reticence.
On the other hand, it is said by those who know in general the President-elect's ideas on foreign policies that if the question is flatly put up to him he either would indicate opposition to the proposed method of granting free tolls to American ships, or favor submission of the question to a court of arbitration.
Castro Not Bidden; Says So Himself.
New York Times 100 years ago today, March 1, 1913:
Goes to Inauguration of His Own Motion — Eulogizes President-Elect.
FOR 'UNION AND FRATERNITY'
Looks to Wilson for "Justice and Mutual Respect" — To Return to Teneriffe.
HAVANA, Feb. 28.— Cipriano Castro, when approached on the subject of his visit to Washington for the Presidential inauguration, said to-day:
"I have not been invited to the inauguration by President-elect Wilson, but am going of my own accord. You may absolutely and without qualification deny all stories to the contrary. Several Cuban newspapers have published stories for which they alone are accountable. I accept no responsibility whatever for them."
Gen. Castro expressed his admiration for Mr. Wilson in the following formal statement:
"My opinion is that the magnificent future of the American continent was saved with the triumph of the candidacy of Woodrow Wilson. I understand that the policy of Mr. Wilson, judging from his political documents that have been circulated up to the present, is one of equity, justice, and mutual respect, which is precisely what the Latin-American republics have claimed from their sister republic of the north.
"If this is so, as we should expect it to be, coming as it does from such a prominent authority, the die is cast, and it would be a crime not only to go backward, but even to impede the triumphant march of the American continent, which is destined to perform such important duties in the future fortunes of humanity.
"This is the grand ideal which I have followed and to which with much pleasure I have sacrificed my life interests and the tranquillity of my family. But I shall be satisfied if we reach the end of our journey with the standard of American rights and our integrity saved. In a word, my motto to-day is 'Union and Continental Fraternity.' "
Gen. Castro will leave here for Key West to-morrow morning, and will arrive in Washington on March From the capital he will proceed to Now York on March 6. After that date his plans have not been arranged, but it is probable he will sail in a few days to rejoin his wife and sisters, who are at Teneriffe, Canary Islands.
The ex-dictator spent the day quietly. He took breakfast and dined this evening with a coterie of Venezuelan and Cuban veterans and attended the theatre tonight.
Gen. Acosta, formerly of Castro's army, said to-day that Castro considered the moment not ripe for his return to Venezuela. He said the ex-President hoped eventually to return to his native land, but that he would not go there until the people called him.
No banquet has been given Gen. Castro here. The only recognition he received at the hands of the Cuban Government was an audience by President Gomez and the loan of the municipal band for his procession of welcome.
Rumors that Castro came to Cuba in connection with a filibustering expedition against Venezuela still lack confirmation. Former President Zelaya or Nicaragua has not arrived here, and Gen. Reyes. ex-President of Colombia, had had no conferences with the Venezuelan. It is said that Castro had offers of two boats here for filibustering purposes, but said he did not want them.
* * *
President-elect Wilson yesterday afternoon branded as untrue the report from Havana that he had invited Cipriano Castro to attend the inauguration ceremonies. "It is unqualifiedly false," he said.
As his train was approaching New York from Philadelphia some one showed him a dispatch from Washington saying that Castro had announced in Havana to Mr. Beaupré, the American Minister, that the President-elect had extended him such an invitation. Beyond the brief statement that it was "unqualifiedly false" ex-Gov. Wilson had no statement to make. It is understood, however, that Castro will be decidedly persona non grata with the incoming Administration, and if he comes to the inauguration it will be on his own initiative and not at the invitation of Mr. Wilson or any of his associates.
Not long ago the President-elect repudiated an announcement made in New York that he would grant Gen. Castro an audience at Princeton. Following this, Castro's counsel issued a statement that the General had never sought an audience, and that he had been put in an embarbrassing position through a misunderstanding.
Special to The New York Times.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 28. — Color was given to-day to the report that Cipriano Castro, ex-President of Venezuela, was to attend the inauguration of President Wilson in the capacity of an invited guest by a dispatch received at the State Department from Minister Beaupré at Havana. This statement was given out by the State Department:
"Minister Beaupré telegraphs from Havana that Castro announces that, as he has been invited by the President-elect to attend the inauguration, he will leave on Saturday for Washington and that he win return to Havana within a few days."
William Corcoran Eustis, Chairman of the Inaugural Committee, said that this was the first time the former President of Venezuela had entered his mind in connection with the inauguration ceremonies. He said that no letter, telegram, or request of any kind had been received by him or any member of the committee in connection with Castro. Mr. Eustis's interpretation of the matter was that some one had played a joke on the Venezuelan and sent him an invitation in the name of the President-elect, or that Castro himself had facetiously made the statement attributed to him by Minister Beaupré.
Mr. Beaupré has been instructed by the Secretary of State to keep the State Department advised as fully as practicable of what Castro says and does.
Major Gen. Leonard Wood, the Grand Marshal of the inaugural parade, when asked if Gen. Castro was to be permitted to have a place in the line, said that the matter had not come before him in any way. He had no knowledge of how Castro's name had come up in connection with the parade, he said, but he considered the ex-dictator's presence very objectionable, and if he attempted to take part in the parade he (Gen. Wood) would he impelled to use his authority as Grand Marshal to have Castro arrested, should that course be necessary to remove him from the column.
Goes to Inauguration of His Own Motion — Eulogizes President-Elect.
FOR 'UNION AND FRATERNITY'
Looks to Wilson for "Justice and Mutual Respect" — To Return to Teneriffe.
HAVANA, Feb. 28.— Cipriano Castro, when approached on the subject of his visit to Washington for the Presidential inauguration, said to-day:
"I have not been invited to the inauguration by President-elect Wilson, but am going of my own accord. You may absolutely and without qualification deny all stories to the contrary. Several Cuban newspapers have published stories for which they alone are accountable. I accept no responsibility whatever for them."
Gen. Castro expressed his admiration for Mr. Wilson in the following formal statement:
"My opinion is that the magnificent future of the American continent was saved with the triumph of the candidacy of Woodrow Wilson. I understand that the policy of Mr. Wilson, judging from his political documents that have been circulated up to the present, is one of equity, justice, and mutual respect, which is precisely what the Latin-American republics have claimed from their sister republic of the north.
"If this is so, as we should expect it to be, coming as it does from such a prominent authority, the die is cast, and it would be a crime not only to go backward, but even to impede the triumphant march of the American continent, which is destined to perform such important duties in the future fortunes of humanity.
"This is the grand ideal which I have followed and to which with much pleasure I have sacrificed my life interests and the tranquillity of my family. But I shall be satisfied if we reach the end of our journey with the standard of American rights and our integrity saved. In a word, my motto to-day is 'Union and Continental Fraternity.' "
Gen. Castro will leave here for Key West to-morrow morning, and will arrive in Washington on March From the capital he will proceed to Now York on March 6. After that date his plans have not been arranged, but it is probable he will sail in a few days to rejoin his wife and sisters, who are at Teneriffe, Canary Islands.
The ex-dictator spent the day quietly. He took breakfast and dined this evening with a coterie of Venezuelan and Cuban veterans and attended the theatre tonight.
Gen. Acosta, formerly of Castro's army, said to-day that Castro considered the moment not ripe for his return to Venezuela. He said the ex-President hoped eventually to return to his native land, but that he would not go there until the people called him.
No banquet has been given Gen. Castro here. The only recognition he received at the hands of the Cuban Government was an audience by President Gomez and the loan of the municipal band for his procession of welcome.
Rumors that Castro came to Cuba in connection with a filibustering expedition against Venezuela still lack confirmation. Former President Zelaya or Nicaragua has not arrived here, and Gen. Reyes. ex-President of Colombia, had had no conferences with the Venezuelan. It is said that Castro had offers of two boats here for filibustering purposes, but said he did not want them.
* * *
President-elect Wilson yesterday afternoon branded as untrue the report from Havana that he had invited Cipriano Castro to attend the inauguration ceremonies. "It is unqualifiedly false," he said.
As his train was approaching New York from Philadelphia some one showed him a dispatch from Washington saying that Castro had announced in Havana to Mr. Beaupré, the American Minister, that the President-elect had extended him such an invitation. Beyond the brief statement that it was "unqualifiedly false" ex-Gov. Wilson had no statement to make. It is understood, however, that Castro will be decidedly persona non grata with the incoming Administration, and if he comes to the inauguration it will be on his own initiative and not at the invitation of Mr. Wilson or any of his associates.
Not long ago the President-elect repudiated an announcement made in New York that he would grant Gen. Castro an audience at Princeton. Following this, Castro's counsel issued a statement that the General had never sought an audience, and that he had been put in an embarbrassing position through a misunderstanding.
Special to The New York Times.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 28. — Color was given to-day to the report that Cipriano Castro, ex-President of Venezuela, was to attend the inauguration of President Wilson in the capacity of an invited guest by a dispatch received at the State Department from Minister Beaupré at Havana. This statement was given out by the State Department:
"Minister Beaupré telegraphs from Havana that Castro announces that, as he has been invited by the President-elect to attend the inauguration, he will leave on Saturday for Washington and that he win return to Havana within a few days."
William Corcoran Eustis, Chairman of the Inaugural Committee, said that this was the first time the former President of Venezuela had entered his mind in connection with the inauguration ceremonies. He said that no letter, telegram, or request of any kind had been received by him or any member of the committee in connection with Castro. Mr. Eustis's interpretation of the matter was that some one had played a joke on the Venezuelan and sent him an invitation in the name of the President-elect, or that Castro himself had facetiously made the statement attributed to him by Minister Beaupré.
Mr. Beaupré has been instructed by the Secretary of State to keep the State Department advised as fully as practicable of what Castro says and does.
Major Gen. Leonard Wood, the Grand Marshal of the inaugural parade, when asked if Gen. Castro was to be permitted to have a place in the line, said that the matter had not come before him in any way. He had no knowledge of how Castro's name had come up in connection with the parade, he said, but he considered the ex-dictator's presence very objectionable, and if he attempted to take part in the parade he (Gen. Wood) would he impelled to use his authority as Grand Marshal to have Castro arrested, should that course be necessary to remove him from the column.
Unite For Belgian Defense.
New York Times 100 years ago today, March 1, 1913:
All Parties Asked to Vote Army Increase in View of Possible War.
BRUSSELS, Feb. 28.— Apprehensions of a possible war between the great European powers appear to exist among the members of the Belgian Cabinet and to be shared also by the leaders of the Opposition parties, who have been taken into the confidence of the Ministry with the object of making the pending increases of the Belgian Army non-partisan in character.
M. Hymans, the leader of the Liberal Party in the House of Representatives, last night said that, as Belgium, in the event of the outbreak of' war, would become the Battleground of Europe, the country must do its utmost to prepare for its defense.
All Parties Asked to Vote Army Increase in View of Possible War.
BRUSSELS, Feb. 28.— Apprehensions of a possible war between the great European powers appear to exist among the members of the Belgian Cabinet and to be shared also by the leaders of the Opposition parties, who have been taken into the confidence of the Ministry with the object of making the pending increases of the Belgian Army non-partisan in character.
M. Hymans, the leader of the Liberal Party in the House of Representatives, last night said that, as Belgium, in the event of the outbreak of' war, would become the Battleground of Europe, the country must do its utmost to prepare for its defense.
Declares Carranza Will Not Surrender.
New York Times 100 years ago today, March 1, 1913:
William A. Staats of this city writes to The Times to deny reports that Gov. Carranza of Coahuila, Mexico, will surrender to the Huerta Government. He declares that he is in receipt daily of messages from the Governor declaring that he will not surrender to be murdered or imprisoned unjustly.
William A. Staats of this city writes to The Times to deny reports that Gov. Carranza of Coahuila, Mexico, will surrender to the Huerta Government. He declares that he is in receipt daily of messages from the Governor declaring that he will not surrender to be murdered or imprisoned unjustly.
Huerta Reviled In Cartoon.
New York Times 100 years ago today, March 1, 1913:
By Marconi Transatlantic Wireless Telegraph to The New York Times.
PARIS, Feb. 28.— Ruy Blas will print to-morrow a cartoon representing Gen. Huerta, Provisional President of Mexico, sitting on a throne whereon is written, "Coward! Assassin! Traitor!"
The figure of Europe is represented as standing in front of him, addressing Mexico as follows: "After the cowardly murder of Madero I will never recognize such a President." Mexico, replying, says: " You acted very differently after the murder of Draga and Alexander."
By Marconi Transatlantic Wireless Telegraph to The New York Times.
PARIS, Feb. 28.— Ruy Blas will print to-morrow a cartoon representing Gen. Huerta, Provisional President of Mexico, sitting on a throne whereon is written, "Coward! Assassin! Traitor!"
The figure of Europe is represented as standing in front of him, addressing Mexico as follows: "After the cowardly murder of Madero I will never recognize such a President." Mexico, replying, says: " You acted very differently after the murder of Draga and Alexander."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)