Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

ties for the delay in bringing Lane to trial. The low state of Allen, who was suffering from the poison, prevented the case from being set down for trial earlier than the 29th September, 1881, in the absence of the principal witness, while since that date the dilatory motions, as before said, have come wholly from the side of the defense.

I have acquainted Mr. Lowell by telegraph of the investigation ordered on receipt of your note and of its result, in order that her Her Majesty's Government may see the jealous watchfulness which this government is disposed to exercise when the inherent right of any accused person, and especially a subject of a friendly state, to a speedy trial on the charges preferred, is is question. I bave, &c.,

FRED'K. T. FRELINGHUYSEN.

No. 46.

Ur. Lowell to Earl Granrille.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

London, April 14, 1822. (Received April 15.) My LORD: I have the honor to acquaint you that I have received this morning two applications for my intervention from citizens of the United States who have been arrested under the protection of person and property act (Ireland) 1881. One of them is William Brophy, who sends his certificate of naturalization, and states that he was arrested on the 4th March last, and is confined in Naas jail. The other is John Leonard Ganpon, who asserts that he was born at Hampton Hill, in the State of Connecticut, on the 13th December, 1852, and imprisoned in the jail at Galway on the 7th May, 1881, on suspicion of being one of an unlawful assembly. Ile says also that he knows nothing further of the charge against him or of his accuser.

I have no information of the causes wby Brophy was arrested, but I shall write to our consul at Dublin to ascertain what is stated in the warrant on this subject, and I may have occasion to address your lordship again in relation to it.

In respect to the case of Mr. Gannon, his imprisonment has now continued for so long a period that I am sure your lordship will understand why I ask your attention to it with unusual earnestness.

It is so contrary to the spirit of English as well as of American law to keep a man in prison for many months without any opportunity of confronting his accusers or of disproving the charges against him, that your lordship cannot be surprised at the great excitement which such cases as this of Mr. Gannon have occasioned in the United States, or at the instructions I have received from my government to ask respectfully that the accused parties may either be released or brought to trial.

I beg leave to repeat this request in the cases of Mr. Brophy and Mr. Gannon, as well as of other American citizens who have been imprisoned in Ireland, some of them for long periods of time. I have, &c.,

J. R. LOWELL.

No. 47.

Mr. Jest to Earl Granrille.

WASHINGTON, April 4, 1882. (Received April 17.) My Lord: I bave the honor to report to your lordship that a bill has been introduced into the Senate by Senator Morgan, of Alabama, to define the rights of American citizens in and when residing in foreign countries. It sets forth that the rights of American citizenship in foreign countries, which are reqnired to be protected in the manner and by the means provided in section 2001 of the Revised Statntes, extend to and include the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, and the right to be exempt from domiciliary visits with out legal warrant, according to the forms of law of the country in which they are dwelling; and the right on demand of themselves or counsel to be informed of the natore and cause of any accusation against them, when they are under arrest or are imprisoned upon a suspicion, or accusation, or charge of being guilty of any crime or offense against the laws of such foreign country; and the right of trial in such cases within a reasonable time to be confronted with witnesses against them, to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in their favor, and to have counsel for their defense. This bill was read and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. I have, &c.,

L. S. SACKVILLE WEST.

No. 48.

Earl Granville to Mr. Lowell.

FOREIGN Office, April 17, 1882. Sir: I have had the honor to receive your letter of the 14th instant, calling my attention to the cases of Messrs. William Brophy and John Leopard Gannon, and other citizens of the United States of America, who are imprisoned in Ireland under the protection of person and property (Ireland) act, 1881.

In reply, I beg leave to state to you that I bave caused your present application on bebalf of these persons to be communicated to the proper department of Her Majesty's Government. I have, &c.,

GRANVILLE.

No. 49.

Earl Granville to Jr. Lowell.

FOREIGN OFFICE, April 19, 18-2. Sir: With reference to my letter of the 29th ultimo, respecting the case of Mr. James L. White, a naturalized American citizen, who has been in custody under the protection of person and property (Ireland) act, 1881, I have the honor now to state to you that I am informed that after causing careful inquiry to be made orders were given by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland for the discharge of this prisoner.

I bave the honor further to observe, with reference to the last paragraph of your letter of the 20th ultimo, that his excellency bas satisfied himself that there was no mistake whatever in the arrest of Mr. White, and that no undue severity was exercised toward him while in custody, but that, on the contrary, he was last month released on parole for ten days, on account of the illness of a relative. I have, &c.,

GRANVILLE.

No. 50.

Mr. Test to Earl Granville.

Washington, April 6, 1882. (Received April 24.) My LORD: At the request of the Secretary of State, I called upon him the day before yesterday, when he put into my bands a communication which he said he was about to make to the House of Representatives, and which, before doing so, he wished me to read, in order that it should not appear in priot without my knowledge, as it related to wbat had passed between us respecting the Irisb-American suspects. Í thanked Mr. Frelinghuysen for bis courtesy, and said that this communication would at all events erince the amicable spirit which animated the two governments.

I have the honor to inclose to your lordship printed copies of this document as it was presented to the House of Representatives. I bave, &c.,

L. S. SACKVILLE WEST.

(Inclosure in No. 50.– Newspaper extract.)

To the President :

The Secretary of State, to whom was referred the resolution of the House of Rep. resentatives of the 31st January last, requesting the President “to obtain a list of all American citizens, naturalized or native-born, under arrest or imprisonment by authority of the British Government, with a statement of the cause or causes of such arrest and imprisonment, and especially such of said citizens as may have been thus arrested and imprisoned under the suspension of the habeas corpus in Ireland, and, if not incompatible with the public interest, that he communicate such information, when received, to this house, together with all correspondence now on file in the Department of State relativg to any existing arrest and imprisonment of citizens as aforesaid,” has the honor to inform the President, in part response to this request of

the House of Representatives, that for some time past active negotiations have been carried on between the two governments. These negotiations bave been conducted in a spirit of entire friendship, and it affords the Secretary of State pleasure to acquaint the President that on the 2d instant information was received by the Department of State that all the American citizens held as prisoners in Ireland bad been released except three, and that since that date the further information has reached him that O'Connor, Hart, Walsh, Dalton, and White are not now in prison. The negotiations are still being conducted with a view to the release of tbe remaining prisoners, and the hope is entertained that a result will be reached satisfactory and honorable alike to both governmente. Respectfully submitted.

FREDK. T FRELINGIIUYSEN. DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, April 4, 1882.

No. 51.

Ur. Jest to Earl Granville.

WASHINGTON, April 8, 1882. (Received April 24.) My LORD: I have the honor to transmit to your Lordship herewith articles from the New York Tribune on the proceedings taken with regard to the Irish-American suspects. The tone of these articles is, on the whole, sarisfactory, and would seem to indicate the general opinion that an unnecessary importance had been attached to a matter wbich was capable of an amicable arrangement. I have, &c.,

L. S. SACKVILLE WEST.

(Inclosure 1 in No. 51.-Extract from the New York Tribune of April 5, 1882.)

Tee Irish-AMERICAN SUSPECTS.—The mass meeting at Cooper Institute calls upon the President to demand forthwith the prompt release of American citizens now unjustly deprived of liberty by the British Government. It bases its action upon section 2001 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, namely:

" Whenever it is made known to the President that any citizen of the United States bas been unjastly deprived of his liberty by or under tbe authority of any foreign government, it shall be the duty of the President forth with to demand of that government the reasons of such imprisonment; and if it appear to be wrongful and in violation of the rights of American citizenship, the President shall forth with demand the release of soch citizen, and if the release so demanded is unreasonably delayed or refused, the President shall use such means, not amounting to acts of war, as he may think necessary and proper to obtain or effectuate the release; and all the facts and proceedings relative thereto shall, as soon as practicable, be communicated by the President to Congress."

Now, in the case of the Irish-American suspects, this statute--one of the most irrational acts ever passed by an incoherent Congress-is practically inoperative. These men have been legally arrested, whatever may be said as to the justice or injustice of the charges. They have been imprisoned under the coercion acts, which are now the public law of Ireland. Legally arrested, they have not been tried; and accordingly there has been no judicial investigation which would enable the President to determine whetber they have been justly or unjustly deprived of their liberty. It is utterly impossible for the President to decide whether the arrest of these suspects has been * wrongful” and in "violation of the rights of Ar rican citizenship," and consequently he cannot deniand their release. Congress never bas given and never can give the Executive the right to demand the unconditional release of an American citizen, natpralized or native-born, who has been legally arrested in another civilized State. If be bas been illegally arrested, or if his innocence bas been established after a judicial investigation, his release may be demanded, but not otherwise.

What, then, is it in the province of the Executive to demand in the case of the IrishAmerican suspects ? Let their naturalization be assumed, and they must be held by Great Britain to be entitled to all the rights which have been guaranteed to citizens of the United States under the naturalization treaty. A fair and impartial trial in accordance with the local law that has been violated is one of those rights, and the Executive is justified in demanding it, for the suspects bave been in prison many

months. But in the proclaimed districts of Ireland the local law has been suspended. The government does not grant to its own subjects the privilege of a jury trial in those districts; and, indeed, a jury trial would not be a judicial process under the circumstances, for each and every suspect would be acquitted without regard to the facts of the case. A fair and impartial trial, by which the innocence or guilt of the accused can be ascertained, is simply out of the question. That is the one demand which our government is competent to make and it is one with which the British Government think it impossible to comply. They might as well discharge the American suspects outright.

Mr. Lowell, who has been denounced by Mr. Randall for his “sickening sycophancy to English influence,” has treated this matter not as an English, Irish, or American question, but purely as a point of international law. He has had no sympathy with the coercion legislation, and has even taken pains to characterize it as exceptional and arbitrary. In his letter to the suspects who applied for his intervention, he says: "The chief object of these measures is to enable the authorities to arrest persons whom they suspect of illegal conduct, without being obliged to produce any proof of their guilt. Its very substance and main purpose are to deprive suspected persons of the speedy trial they desire. This law is, of course, contrary to the spirit and foundation principles of both English and American jurisprudence. But it is the law of the land, and it controls all persons domiciled in the proclaimed districts of Ireland, whether they are British subjects or not; and it is manifestly futile to claim that naturalized citizens of the United States should be exempted from its operation.”

That law legalized the arrest of the suspects in districts where tbe writ of habeas corpus had been suspended, and where the natives were not allowed the privilege of a jury trial. To have demanded their unconditional release, when no discrimination had been made between them and the natives, would have been an open affront to a friendly power. What Mr. Lowell did was to follow the best precedents of criminal jurisdiction in international cases, several of which had been established during the American civil war, when British subjects were arbitrarily arrested and denied the privilege of trial. At the same time, he has conducted the negotiations with the Foreign Office with so much tact and decision that we are inclined to expect a speedy clearance of the Irish jails from suspects whose citizenship in the United States is authenticated. Whatever may be the privileges of the natives, the British Government are not likely to incur the odium of imprisoning foreigners for indefinite terms without trial. They will be glad to release them, if they can be assured that their naturalization papers shall not be used as a safe-conduct for conspiracy in the proclaimed districts of Ireland.

(Inclosure 2 in No. 51.-Extract from the New York Tribune of April 6, 1882.)

Mr. LOWELL'S SUCCESS.- Mr. Lowell's negotiations for the release of the IrishAmerican suspects have been crownell with partial success. Before the mass meeting at Cooper Institute disgraced itself by leaping reproaches upon him, the Department of State bad received official information that all but three of these prisoners had been set at liberty in response to the request of the United States minister. The three suspects who have not been released are McSweeney, McEnery, and O'Mahoney. Two of these are undoubtedly naturalized citizens, and as such are entitled to a fair and impartial trial. The British Government is either unable or unwilling to order a judicial investigation, but it will not incur the odium of imprisoning the citizens of another State for an indefinite period. The leading English journals concedes that any suspect whose naturalization in the United States can be established will be released if he agrees to leave the country; and the State Department has every reason to expect that this action will be speedily taken in these two cases. There is some doubt as to the validity of O'Mahoney's naturalization, but the chances are in favor of his release, as the British Foreign Oflice does not seem to be disposed to make an exception in his case on technical grounds if he will promise to leave Ireland as soon as he is released.

Mr. Frelinghuysen reports that the negotiations have been carried on between the two governments for some time "in a spirit of entire friendsbip.” This result has been promoted by the cordial relations existing between Lord Granville and Mr. Lowell. The fact that our government has been represented in these negotiations by one of our foremost men of letters has been a most fortunate circumstance. Mr. Lowell had won the respect and admiration of the best men in English public life, and when be came to plead for these suspects his personal character and popularity were of direct service to them. Bluster and bad manners would have prolonged their imprisonment and disturbed the relations of the two countries. Mr. Lowell made, as our special cable dispatches bave stated, every effort consistent with diplomatic usage, and at the same time performed a most delicate duty with such consummate tact as to remove all sources of irritation. The result has been that as soon as the formalities of proving the naturalization of the suspects have been complied with, all but threc of them have

been released, and the liberation of the remaining prisoners is confidently expected by the State Department.

The delicacy of Mr. Lowell's task will be better appreciated if the fact be borne in mind that the British Government is struggling hand over hand with a formidable conspiracy which has been directly promoted by the Irish citizens of the United States. The passage of the land act would have paralyzed the League if the Parnellites had not been forced by pressure from this side of the ocean to denounce it and to proclaiın tbe repudiation of rent-paying. It has been moral and pecuniary support from the American base of supplies which has enabled the agitators to defy the Liberal Government and to prolong indefinitely a blustering period of lawlessness and anarchy in Ireland. Not a week passes but there are cowardly assassinations and revolting crimes committed in every quarter of the island. Tenants whose sole offense is a disposition to pay their debts and to live in peace with their landlords are murdered in cold blood. Land agents are fired at from hedges, and innocent women are butchered in the high roads. We do not say that the Land League organization and its American contributors are responsible for the shocking crimes, but it cannot be denied that they have delayed the pacification of the island which might have been effected under the beneficent clauses of the land act, and by prolonging the agitation have multiplied opportunities for agrarian horrors.

Is it to be wondered at that the British Government should have hesitated before releasing suspects whose only claim for consideration was a questionable citizenship in the United States? The money contributed for the cause could not be intercepted'; the patriotic sympathy and moral support could not be counteracted; but those who came from America to instigate revolution and crime must share the risks with native conspirators. This being the English view of the case, diplomatic intervention in bebalf of the suspects was extremely likely to excite intense irritation. If, therefore, Mr. Lowell bas dispatched the business, rescued the prisoners, and asserted the rights of American citizenship, without causing bitterness or estrangement between the two governments, he is entitled to the gratitude of Americans and Englishmen alike. If his intellectual attainments, his graces of mavner, and his personal friendships in English society have contributed to that end, it was not a mistake to send to the court of St. James an American gentleman.

No. 52.

Jr. Test to Earl Granrille.

WASHINGTON, April 11, 1882. (Received April 24.) My Lord: With reference to my dispatch of the 28th ultimo, I have the honor to inclose herewith to your lordship copy of a further note which I have received from the Secretary of State respecting the imprisonment of William Lane.

From the correspondence inclosed in your lordship's dispatch of the 29th ultimo, it would seem that Mr. Frelinghuysen, in his communications with Mr. Lowell, sought to connect this case with the question of the release of the Irish-American suspects, as I anticipated he might do, as reported to your lordship in my above-mentioued dispatch. I have, &c.,

L. S. SACKVILLE WEST.

(Inclosure in No. 32 )

Mr. Frelinghuysen to Mr. West.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, April 10, 1882. Sir: Referring to my reply of the 28th ultimo to your note of the 24th of that month, in relation to the imprisonment of a British subject named William Lane, at Detroit, Michigan, I now have the honor to inform you that I have received a letter from the attorney-general of Michigan, in which that officer states that the prisoner in question has leen convicted of an assault with intent to murder. I bave, &c.,

F. T. FRELINGHUYSEN.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »