Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

and London. The Secretary of State confidently hopes that results will be reached satisfactory to both governments. Respectfully submitted.

FRED'K T. FRELINGHUYSEN. The PRESIDENT.

LIST OF PAPERS: 1.-The coercion act. 2.- Mr. Blaine to Mr. Lowell (No. 138), March 31, 1881. 3.-Same to same (No. 166), May 26, 1881. 4.-Same to same. Telegram, May 26, 1881. 5.-Same to same (No. 167), May 27, 1881, with an accompaniment. 6.-Same to same (No. 168), May 27, 1881, with an accompaniment. 7.-Same to same. Telegram, June 2, 1881. 8.-Same to same (No. 172), June 2, 1881, with accompaniments. 9.-Mr. Lowell to Mr. Blaine (No. 193), June 4, 1881. 10.-Same to same (No. 194), June 4, 1881. 11.-Mr. Badeau to Mr. Hitt (No. 1158), June 17, 1881. 12.—Mr. Lowell to Mr. Blaine (No. 205), June 18, 1881. 13.—Mr. Lowell to Mr. Blaine (No. 218), July 15, 1881, with accompaniments. 14.—Mr. Brooks to Mr. Hitt (No. 40), July 30, 1881, with an accompaniment. 15.—Mr. Lowell to Mr. Blaine (No. 235), August 11, 1881, with accompaniments. 16.-Mr. Hoppin to Mr. Blaine (No. 220), November 14, 1881, with accompaniments. 17.-Mr. Blaine to Mr. Lowell (No. 285), December 9, 1881, with accompaniments.

18.- Mr. Lowell to Mr. Frelinghuysen (No. 300), January 30, 1882, with accompaniments.

19.—Mr. Frelinghuysen to Mr. Lowell (No. 313), January 31, 1882, with an accompaniment.

20.—Mr. Lowell to Mr. Frelinghuysen (No. 305), February 4, 1882, with an accompaniment.

21.-Mr. Davis to Mr. Lowell (No. 316) February 10, 1882, with accompaniments. 22.-Same to same (No. 317), February 10, 1882, with an accompaniment. 23.-Mr. Lowell to Mr. Frelinghuysen (No. 322), February 24, 18-2. 24.-Same to same (No. 331), March 14, 1882, with accompaniments. 25.-Mr. Frelinghuysen to Mr. Lowell (No. 333), March 17, 1882, with an accompani26,-Mr. Frelinghuysen to Mr. Lowell. Telegram, March 3, 1882. 27.-Mr. Lowell to Mr. Frelinghuysen. Telegram, March 4, 1882. 28.—Mr. Frelinghuysen to Mr. Lowell, Telegram, March 4, 1882. 29.-Mr. Lowell to Mr. Frelinghuysen. Telegram, March 7, 1882. 30.- Mr. Frelinghuysen to Mr. Lowell. Telegram, March 16, 1882. 31.-Mr. Lowell to Mr. Frelinghuysen. Telegram, March 17, 1882. 32.—Mr. Frelinghuysen to Mr. Lowell. Telegram, March 25, 1882. 33.-Mr. Lowel to Mr. Frelinghuysen. Telegram, March 29, 1882. 34.-Same to same. Telegram, March 31, 1882. 35.-Same to same. Telegram, April 2, 1882. 36.—Same to same. Telegram, April 3, 1882.

ment.

No. 1.

THE COERCION ACT.

A. D. 1881.

CHAPTER 4.-An act for the better protection of person and property

in Ireland. [20 March, :881.] Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, and by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

1. (1.) Any person who is declared by warrant of the lord lieutenant to be reasonably suspected of having at

Power of lord lieutenant to arrest and detain.

any time since the thirtieth day of September, one thousand eight hundred and eighty, been guilty as principal or accessory of high treason, treason-felony, or treasonable practices, wherever committed, or of any crime punishable by law, committed at any time since the thirtieth day of September, one thousand eight hundred and eighty, in a prescribed district, being an act of violence or intimidation, or the inciting to an act of violence or intimidation, and tending to interfere with or disturb the maintenance of law and order, may be arrested in any part of Ireland and legally detained, during the continuance of this act, in such prison in Ireland as may from time to time be directed by the lord lieutenant, without bail or mainprize; and shall zint be discharged or tried by any court without the direction of the lord lieutenant; and every such warrant shall, for the purposes of this act, be conclusive evidence of all matters therein contained, and of the jurisdiction to issue and execute such warrant, and of the legality of the arrest and detention of the person mentioned in such warrant.

(2) Every warrant whereby any person is declared to be reasonably suspected of any crime other than high treason, treason-felony, or treasonable practices, shall state the character of such crime. A copy of the warrant of arrest shall be given to each person arrested under this act on the occasion of his arrest.

(3.) Any person detained in pursuance of a warrant under this act shall be treated as a person accused of crime and not as a convicted prisoner, subject to the special rules for the time being in force with respect to prisoners awaiting trial: Provided that the lord lieutenant may from time to time, if he shall think fit, make regulations modifying such special rules so far as they relate to persons detained under this act. Any regulations made by the lord lieutenant under this provision shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament within fourteen days after the making of the same, if Parliament be then sitting, and if not, then within fourteen days after the next meeting of Parliament, and when Parliament is not sitting such regulations shall, within fourteen days, be published in the Dublin Gazette.

(4.) A list of all persons for the time being detained in prison under this act, with a statement opposite each person's name of the prison in which he is detained for the time being, and of the ground stated for his arrest in the warrant under which he is detained, shall be laid before each House of Parliament within the first seven days of every month during which Parliament is sitting, and when Parliament is not sitting such list shall be published in the Dublin Gazette within the first seven days of every month.

(5.) On the expiration of a period of three months after the arrest of each person detained under this act, and so from time to time on the expiration of each succeeding period of three months while such person is detained, the lord lieutenant shall consider the case of such person and decide thereon; and the decision of the lord lieutenant in that behalf shall be certified under his hand, or the hand of the chief secre. tary to the lord lieutenant, to each clerk of the Crown, by whom a copy of the warrant under which such person shall be detained shall be filed in his public office, under this act, and each such clerk of the Crown shall record such decision by indorsement on the copy of the warrant so filed in his office.

(6.) No person discharged from detention under this act shall be so discharged at a greater distance than five miles from the place whereat he was first arrested under this act, unless he shall himself prefer to

Grant of out-door re.

44 Vict., c. 14.

Supplemental provis.

be discharged at a place nearer to the prison wherein he was last detained.

(7.) “Prescribed district” means any part of Ireland in that behalf specified by an order of the lord lieutenant for the time being in force, and the lord lieutenant, by and with the advice of the Privy Council in Ireland, may from time to time make, and when made, revoke and alter any such order.

2. The enactments contained in the third section of the vicc. 13 & relief of distress (Ireland) act, 1880, as amended by the

ninth section of the relief of distress (Ireland) amend. ment act, 1880, shall, so far as relates to tbe families of persons for the time being detained under this act, continue in force during the continuance of this act.

3. (1.) Any warrant or order of the lord lieutenant un. ions as to warranis, &c. der this act may be signified under his hand or the hand of the chief secretary to the lord lieutenant, and a copy of every warrantun. der this act shall, within seven days after the execution thereof, be transmitted to the clerk of the Crown for the county in which was the last known place of abode of the person arrested under such warrant, and be filed by the said clerk of the Crown in his public office in said county; and a further copy of every such warrant shall, within seven days after the execution thereof, be transmitted to the clerk of the Crown for the county of the city of Dublin, and be filed by him in his public office in that city; and each such clerk of the Crown shall furnish a copy of such warrant free of charge, certified under his hand to be a true copy, on demand, to any relative of the person arrested under such warrant or his solicitor.

(2.) The lord lieutenant, by and with the advice of the Privy Council in Ireland, may from time to time make, and when made revoke and alter, an order prescribing the forms of warrants for the purposes of this act, and any forms so prescribed shall when used be valid in law.

(3.) If any member of either House of Parliament be arrested under this act the fact shall be immediately communicated to the House of which he is a member, if Parliament be sitting at the time, or if Parliament be not sitting, then immediately after Parliament reassembles, in like manner as if he were arrested on a criminal charge.

(4.) Every order under this act shall be published in the Dublin Gazette, and the production of a printed copy of the Dublin Gazette purporting to be printed and published by the Queen's authority, con. taining the publication of any order under this act, shall be conclusive evidence of the contents of such order, and of the date thereof, and of the same having been duly made.

(5.) The expression “lord lieutenant” means the lord lieutenant of Ireland or other chief governor or governors of Ireland for the time being.

4. This act shall continue in force until the thirtieth day of September, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-two, and no longer.

Continuance of act

No. 2.

Mr. Blaine to Mr. Louell. No. 138.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, March 31, 1881. Sir: I have received your dispatch No. 140, of the 12th instant, in relation to the arrest of Mr. Michael P. Boyton, and his application for

protection as an American citizen. Your action thereon, in connection with your previous action on Mr. Boyton's application for a new passport, receives the entire commendation of the Department as discreet and proper. The facts so far elicited show the wisdom and importance of a careful examination of cases giving rise to international complaints; and while it is most desirable to omit no steps, or take no positive action which might result in unduly embarrassing an American citizen in the assertion of his personal rights, or hindering his immediate protection in case of urgent need, it is, on the other hand, equally desirable that you should be (as you appear to have been) watchful to guard against introducing any avoidable element of uncertainty or contradiction into the discussion of questions of such intrinsic gravity between the two governments.

In the case of Mr. Boyton, as in any other which may arise, I have every confidence in your discretion equally with your zeal in the protection of American rights. I am, &c.,

JAMES G. BLAINE.

No. 3.

Mr. Blaine to Mr. Lowell.

No. 166.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, May 26, 1881. SIR: Since my instruction of the 31st of March last, in reply to your No. 110 of the 12th of that month, touching the case of Mr. Michael P. Boyton, I have received your Nos. 144 of March 21, 147 of March 25, and 154 of April 7, all relating to the same subject.

The prudence you have shown in dealing with Mr. Boyton's claim of citizenship is commendable, and the statements as to the law in his case, made in your letters to him, are in full accord with the interpretation of this Department.

In answer to a resolution of the Senate, calling for the facts and correspondence in the matter, I laid before the President a full report, which was communicated to the Senate on the 20th instant. In that report I showed that the evidence presented by Mr. Boyton himself, and by his friends bere in his behalf, was not such as to prove his claim to citizenship under our laws.

Had his citizenship been established, I should not have hesitated to do for him all which I could properly do for an American citizen accused of offending against British law in British jurisdiction. How far such protection would avail to relieve an American citizen from the operation of a British law, is a point I am not prepared to express an opinion upon, in view especially of the fact that a copy of the so-called "coercion act," under which the Boyton proceedings were had, has not yet been sent to me.

From its tenor, as described by the press, it contains provisions giving a latitude of action to the British authorities which this government would be loath to see insisted upon in the case of an American citizen. For example, upon reasonable suspicion of the commission, within a fixed time prior to the passage of the law, an act therein defined as giving cause for arrest, the authorities are understood to be empowered to decree the detention of any person, and his imprison

re

ment for a prolonged period without the obligation of speedy trial, or the production of proof of criminality.

While in some sense an ex post facto enactment it is in others a conferment of arbitrary and irresponsible power, and, in either view, pugnant to the principles of civil liberty and personal rights, which are the common glory of British and American jurisprudence.

That the fact of American citizenship could, of itself, operate to exempt any one from the penalties of a law which he had violated is, of course, an untenable proposition. Conversely, however, the proposi. tion that a retroactive law, suspending at will the simplest operations of justice, could be applied without question to an American citizen, is one to which this government would not give anticipatory assent.

In the specific case of Mr. Boyton, it is inferred from your statement of the facts that the act complain of, the incitement of divers persons to murder divers other persons, was committed subsequently to the passage of the protection act. Had Mr. Boyton's American citizenship been established, we could not, in view of this, have pleaded the retroactive application of the law.

Neither could we have decently protested against the application of some process of law where so grave an offense was charged against a foreigner while a guest in the dominions of a friendly state. The alle. gation that such an act was done by an alien and a guest, while throw. ing upon the country to which the offender owes allegiance no duty to defend him or disprove his crime, on the other hand does not absolve the justice of the country, where the commission of the act is alleged, from the burden of proving the guilt of the criminal, by due course of law within a reasonable time, or, in default of prompt and lawful proof, from the obligation of releasing him.

Immunity would not be asked, but prompt and certain justice under the usual and unstrained operation of law would be certainly expected.

I have set these views before you hypothetically, as suggested by Mr. Boyton's case, not as applicable thereto. It is not desired that you should communicate them to Her Majesty's Government in advance of any case warranting our intervention, but you will bear them in mind if a contingency should unhappily arise calling for your interposition. I am, &c.,

JAMES G. BLAINE.

No. 4.

Mr. Blaine to Mr. Louell.

[Telegram.]

MAY 26, 1881. Evidence of Joseph D’Alton's American birth said to have been sent to Consul Barrows. If reasonably satisfactory, say to Lord Granville that if charges lie against D'Alton warranting legal process we expect no less than a speedy and impartial trial, or, if not tried, his prompt release.

BLAINE,

Secretary.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »