attention due to its exceptional gravity. The question of United States citizenship being of the essence of any successful appeal to the British Government for clemency or immediate justice in Mr. Boyton's behalf, every effort has been made to substantiate the status claimed for him. It is, however, no more apparent to the Department at the present time than it was a month ago that Mr. Boyton is entitled to protection as a citizen of the United States. The claim of citizenship, as formulated by Mr. Boyton, has had three distinct bases. These are: 1st. The issuance of a passport to M. P. Boyton, by Mr. Seward, then Secretary of State, on November 20, 1866. As will be seen from the accompanying papers (Appendix No. 7), Mr. Boyton made oath on that day, before the passport officer of the Department of State, that he was born in the State of New York on or about the 5th day of September, 1844, and that he was a native and loyal citizen of the United States. The passport issued to him agreed with that affidavit. As all the evidence now submitted to me contradicts that statement, and as Mr. Boyton himself seems prepared to make oath that the record is "entirely erroneous," and that he was born in Ireland on the 5th of September, 1846, I am constrained to disregard that passport as issued on mistaken evidence of right thereto. For, under the law and the rules of the Department, had the applicant been known to be, as is now asserted, an alien minor, a passport would have been refused to him unless upon production of legal proof of his father's naturalization. 2d. The alleged naturalization of Mr. Terence Boyton, father of Mr. Michael P. Boyton, while the latter was still a minor. The affidavits submitted by the family of Mr. Boyton the elder, agreeing with the corrected statements of Mr. Michael P. Boyton, leave no room to doubt that the father came to the United States in 1859, settled at Pittsburg, in Pennsylvania, declared his intention to become a citizen before the court of quarter sessions of Allegheny County, on the 22d of August, 1860, and subsequently removing to Newport, R. I., died there in 1870. Although several statements are presented that Mr. Terence Boyton was known to have been naturalized at some time, yet the date is not fixed, and no legal proof of the fact is adduced. The widow of Mr. Terence Boyton affirms that her husband was duly naturalized "on or about 1860," and that she saw his papers and heard them read. The son, in his letter to Mr. Lowell, at first assigned the same date, which is evidently erroneous, as the record of the court shows that the father then merely declared his intention to become a citizen. This record has been promptly produced by the friends of Mr. Boyton, who seem, however, to be unable to produce the like evidence of Mr. Terence Boyton's naturalization. Admitting that Mr. Michael P. Boyton was born, as stated by him, on the 5th of September, 1846, it is necessary to prove that his father completed his naturalization in due form of law on or before the 5th of September, 1867, in order to entitle him, the son, to the rights and benefits of citizenship under existing laws. The circumstances, as stated, that Mr. Terence Boyton was drafted in 1862, and that he voted at several elections in Pittsburg, neither establish the fact nor the date of his alleged naturalization. 3d. The alleged operation of law in the case of an alien serving in the Navy of the United States during the war of the rebellion. The legal question involved is so concisely and lucidly set forth in Mr. Lowell's letter of March 25, 1881, to Mr. Boyton, that I need do no more than refer to that opinion as correctly representing the view of the Department. The law appealed to did not naturalize any one without his violation and concurrence, but required his recourse to the courts, merely facilitating. the process of naturalization; and there is no reason to suppose that Mr. Boyton ever availed himself of that statute, even if its applicability in his instance were beyond question. That Mr. Michael P. Boyton has for years honestly believed himself to be a citizen of the United States, and that he has lived and acted in that belief without troubling himself to verify the law and the facts in his case, is to my mind perfectly clear. Unfortunately, however, questions of naturalization and citizenship depend upon law and fact, and not upon sentiment or belief. The proof which would be necessary to establish the personal status of citizenship in the simplest case in which it might be involved before our own courts is not the less necessary in the wider range of international jurisprudence, and in matters perhaps vitally affecting the mutual relations of independent states. It is especially, none the less necessary in questions arising with Great Britain, in view of the existence of a specific treaty between the two countries in the matter of naturalization, which makes the operation of law within the United States necessary to assure to a former British subject recognition in Great Britain of the rights of American citizenship. I view Mr. Boyton's case, in all these lights, as one of hardship, and no means have been spared to relieve him. The representations of the United States minister at London, and of the consul at Dublin, have secured for him every possible attention in mitigation of the discomforts of his detention. Were I in possession of proof of the naturalization of the father during the son's minority, or of the performance of any legal act by the son, whereby the latter's citizenship would be established, I would not hesitate to take every step warrantable by international law and justice in his behalf. Even as it is, so strongly does his case appeal to sympathy that, if the sense of the Senate should favor such a course, I would cheerfully counsel the President to appeal to the friendly benevolence of the British Government, representing Mr. Boyton's position as that of a man who, secure for years in the self-conviction of his rights as a citizen, has failed to fortify them as he could have done by law long ago, and urging his immediate trial if evidence exists against him to warrant such proceeding, or release on condition of returning to this country, here to acquire the status and fulfil the obligations of a faithful and law-abiding citizen. The official correspondence in the case and the evidence possessed as to Mr. Boyton's allegiance are herewith transmitted. As evidence of the widespread interest excited in this country by the arrest of Mr. Boyton, I also have pleasure in laying before you for transmission to the Senate a selection of the appeals which have been addressed to the administration by societies and individuals throughout the Union. Respectfully submitted. JAMES G. BLAINE. LIST OF ACCOMPANYING PAPERS. 1. Consul Barrows to Mr. Hay, No. 71, Dublin, November 11, 1880. 2. Mr. Hay to Consul Barrows, No. 52, December 2, 1880. 3. Mr. Lowell to Mr. Blaine, No. 140, London March 12, 1881, with accompaniments. 8. Mr. Patrick Ford to Mr. Blaine, New York, April 25, 1881. No. 1. Consul Barrows to Mr. Hay. No. 71.] CONSULATE OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: I have the honor to report that a day or two since Mr. Michael P. Boyton, who represented himself to be an American citizen, produced to me a passport issued to him by the State Department requesting me to rise it. The passport in question was issued November 20, 1866, signed by Secretary Seward (No, 28820), and describes Boyton as twenty-two years of age. Inasmuch as Boyton is one of the traversers in the state prosecutions now pending I have thought it my duty to refuse the services requested. Mr. Boyton has been several times in the United States since the issuance of his passport. He has not called for the document since leaving it here. I may add that this is the only case which has been brought to my notice officially in connection with the state prosecutions, wherein naturalized American citizens now in Ireland are liable to be concerned. I have to ask that full instructions be sent me in case Mr. Boyton claims American protection. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. JOHN HAY, Assistant Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. B. H. BARROWS, United States Consul. Mr. Hay to Consul Barrows. No. 53.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: Your dispatch of the 11th ultimo, No. 71, in relation to the passport of Michael P. Boyton, has been received. Mr. Boyton appears by the records of the Department to be a native-born citizen of the United States, having been born in the State of New York. The passport in question was regularly issued to him, but the executive regulations upon the subject require that a passport in order to render it available must be renewed at the end of two years. You were therefore right in refusing your visé in the present instance, the document being fourteen years old. With reference to your course in case Mr. Boyton shall hereafter make application to you for protection on the ground of his American citizenship, it is not expedient to give you any special instructions on that question in advance of its actual occurrence. Should any such application be made to you by Mr. Boyton, it will be proper for you to report the facts to the Department, and at the same time to the American minister at London, wi h a view to such instructions as may then be found necessary and proper. Mr. Boyton is no doubt aware of the general rule of international law, namely, that a citizen of one country who becomes either a resident or sojourner in another, and offends against the criminal laws of the latter, is amenable to those laws in the same manner and to the same extent as a citizen or subject of the country whose laws may be thus contravened. SIR: I have the honor to acquaint you that, on the 10th of February last, I received a letter from B. H. Barrows, esq., the consul of the United States at Dublin, inclosing an old passport issued to Michael P. Boyton (one of the traversers in the late state trials in Dublin) on the 20th November, 1866, by Mr. Seward, then Secretary of State. He stated that Mr. Boyton had applied to him to risa this passport, which he had refused, and that he had reported his action to the Department of State, which had approved of the same, and that at Mr. Boyton's request he now forwarded the old passport to me, asking whether, under the circumstances, I could issue to him a new one. I replied to Mr. Barrows, on the 10th of February, that under ordinary circumstances Mr. Boyton, upon producing his old passport, proving that he is the person named therein, and taking the oath prescribed by statute, would be entitled to a new passport; that if the Department of State approved of Mr. Barrows's refusal to visa his old papers upon the ground that he was one of the traversers in the late state trials, this would be a reason why I should not give him a new passport; but if Mr. Barrows's action was approved because it would have been irregular to risa a passport more than two years after its date, there would be no objection perhaps to issuing another one, it being understood that it would be necessary in such case for Mr. Boynton to present himself in person at this legation, and take the affidavit required by law. I requested Mr. Barrows to send me a copy of his correspondence with the Department on this subject. I received a reply to this letter from Mr. Barrows on the 15th of February, a copy of which I herewith inclose. He also sent me copies of his letters to Mr. Hay, Assistant Secretary of State, dated on the 12th of November last, and of Mr. Hay's answer to the same, dated on the 2d of December last. You will observe that Mr. Boyton stated to Mr. Barrows that he was not a nativeborn citizen, having been born in Ireland but taken to America when he was a child. He appears to have declared in his application to the State Department that he was born in the State of New York. I answered Mr. Barrows's letter on the 16th of February to the effect that if Mr. Boyton was taken to America when a child and claimed citizenship on that ground, it would be necessary for him to prove that his father was naturalized there. I herewith inclose a copy of this letter. No further correspondence upon this subject took place until the 8th of March instant, when I received late in the evening a telegram from Mr. Boyton, dated at Kildare, Ireland, in the following words: "I am an American citizen and protest against an outrage to which I have been this day subjected by being arrested on a warrant which charges no offense. I claim the protection of my government." I thereupon, the next day, addressed a letter to Mr. Barrows at Dublin, requesting him to ascertain, in the first place, whether Mr. Boyton is an American citizen, and, if this should be shown to his (Mr. Barrows's) satisfaction, then that he should examine into the grounds of Boyton's arrest, and if the facts should justify the belief that his complicity with treasonable or seditious objects had not been made out, that Mr. Barrows should then apply to the authorities for his discharge or to be informed why he is detained. I herewith inclose a copy of my letter, to which I have not yet received any answer. I have the honor to be, with great respect, your obedient servant, J. R. LOWELL. [Inclosure 1 in 140.] Consul Barrows to Mr. Lowell. CONSULATE OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of yours 10th instant, relative to the application of Michael P. Boyton for a new passport. I explained to Mr. Boyton that his personal attendance before you was necessary, but he first desired an expression of opinion, and thereupon I sent in his application. Copies of the dispatches relating to this matter are herewith submitted. Mr. Boyton told me that he was not a native-born citizen, having been born in Ireland, but taken to America when he was a child. You will observe that the Assistant Secretary says the State Department records state he was born in the State of New York. I have to-day written Mr. Boyton informing him that in order to make application for the reissue of his passport he must appear before you in London. SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 14th instant, in relation to the case of Michael P. Boyton. The fact that he has already received a passport from the Department of State will not, in my opinion, entitle him to a new one, inasmuch as this original passport was granted upon the supposition that he was born in the United States. If, as he now declares, he was born in Ireland and taken to America when he was a child, it will be necessary for him to prove that his father was naturalized there. And this can only be done satisfactorily by producing his father's letters of naturalization. It is well that Mr. Boyton should understand this before taking the trouble to come to London. SIR:I received last night a telegram from Mr. Michael P. Boyton, stating that he is an American citizen, and protesting against an alleged outrage to which he has been subject by being arrested on a warrant which he says charges no offense. He thereupon claims the protection of the United States Government. This telegram is dated at Kildare, but I see by to-day's Times that he has been taken to Kilmainham jail, in the neighborhood of Dublin. I prefer not to correspond directly with Mr. Boyton, and I must request you to see him and make such inquiries into his case as will enable me to take the proper action in regard to it. It is necessary to ascertain, in the first place, whether he is an American citizen or not. By a reference to the correspondence I have already had with you upon his application for a new passport, you will observe that while it appears by the records of the State Department at Washington that he claimed to have been born in New York, he has lately stated to you that he was born in Ireland, but taken to America when he was a child. I must consider, under the circumstances, this latter statement to be the true one. He must, therefore, prove that he has been naturalized in the United States, or that his parents have been naturalized, in order to be entitled to the privileges of citizenship. If the fact of his American citizenship should thus be ascertained to your satisfaction, I desire then that you should carefully examine into the grounds of his arrest, and if the precise facts justify the belief that no substantial charge of his complicity with treasonable or seditious objects can be made out, you will communicate this to the authorities in Ireland and request his discharge or to be informed why he is detained. You will please intimate, in respectful terms and without any warmth or suggestion of threats, that you are making these inquiries under my instructions, and are acting precisely as British consuls in the United States acted soon after the civil war under the directions of the British minister at Washington, in cases of summary arrests of British subjects. It is my duty to protect, so far as I can, all citizens of the United States, whether native or naturalized, who are shown to be innocent of designs to subvert civil order, and I should not perhaps require in such cases evidence of innocence so full and conclusive as that which might be required in a court of law. At the same time I shall by no means try to screen any persons who are evidently guilty of offending against the criminal laws of Great Britian. I have to request that in Mr. Boyton's case, as well as all similar ones, you will be cautions and temperate, and at the same time vigilant and firm, and that you will promptly report your action to me. I am, sir, your obedient servant, BENJAMIN H. BARROWS, Esq., Consul of the United States, Dublin, Ireland J. R. LOWELL. No. 4. Mr. Lowell to Mr. Blaine. No. 144.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: Referring to my dispatch No. 140 of the 12th of March last, to your predecessor, I have the honor to report such proceedings as have taken place subsequent to that date in relation to the case of Michael P. Boyton. I received on the 17th instant a letter from Mr. Barrows, the consul at Dublin, stating the result of an interview he had had with Mr. Boyton, in accordance with my request to that effect, and repeating certain statements made by the latter gentleman in relation to his citizenship. He inclosed also a letter from Mr. Boyton to myself. I forward herewith copies of both these documents. The discrepancies in Mr. Boyton's allegations in respect to his citizenship were so evident that I thought it proper to address him directly upon the subject. I herewith inclose a copy of my letter. I have this morning received a further communication from Mr. Barrows, containing an amended statement as to Mr. Boyton's father's naturalization, upon which his own claims to citizenship are founded. The exact dates, however, are not given. I herewith inclose a copy of Mr. Boyton's last statement. I have the honor to be, with great respect, your obedient servant, J. R. LOWELL. |