emand been made for the
surrender of these refugees. That there was urgent need of asylum is
shown by Mr. Egan's note of August 24, 1891, describing the disorders
that prevailed in Santiago, and by the evidence of Captain Schley
as to the pillage and violence that prevailed at Valparaiso. The
correspondence discloses, however, that the request of Mr. Egan for a
safe conduct from the country in behalf of these refugees was denied.
The precedents cited by him in the correspondence, particularly the case
of the revolution in Peru in 1865, did not leave the Chilean Government
in a position to deny the right of asylum to political refugees, and
seemed very clearly to support Mr. Egan's contention that a safe conduct
to neutral territory was a necessary and acknowledged incident of the
asylum. These refugees have very recently, without formal safe conduct,
but by the acquiescence of the Chilean authorities, been placed on
board the _Yorktown_, and are now being conveyed to Callao, Peru.
This incident might be considered wholly closed but for the disrespect
manifested toward this Government by the close and offensive police
surveillance of the legation premises which was maintained during most
of the period of the stay of the refugees therein. After the date of my
annual message, and up to the time of the transfer of the refugees to
the _Yorktown_, the legation premises seemed to have been surrounded by
police in uniform and police agents or detectives in citizen's dress,
who offensively scrutinized persons entering or leaving the legation,
and on one or more occasions arrested members of the minister's family.
Commander Evans, who by my direction recently visited Mr. Egan at
Santiago, in his telegram to the Navy Department described the legation
as "a veritable prison," and states that the police agents or detectives
were after his arrival withdrawn during his stay. It appears further
from the note of Mr. Egan of November 20, 1891, that on one occasion at
least these police agents, whom he declares to be known to him, invaded
the legation premises, pounding upon its windows and using insulting and
threatening language toward persons therein. This breach of the right
of a minister to freedom from police espionage and restraint seems to
have been so flagrant that the Argentine minister, who was dean of
the diplomatic corps, having observed it, felt called upon to protest
against it to the Chilean minister of foreign affairs. The