Page images
PDF
EPUB

more

Vereieigte
Staaten,

250,000,000. The struggle of to day is not altogether for to day. It is No. 169. for a vast future also. With a firm reliance on Providence, all the firm and earnest, let us proceed in the great task which events have 3. Dechr. devolved upon us. Washington, Decbr. 3, 1861.

Abraham Lincoln.

1861.

No. 170.

Gross

1861.

[ocr errors]

GROSSBRITANNIEN. Der königl. Gesandte in Washington an den amerikanischen Min. d. Ausw. Die ungesetzliche Verhaftung britischer Unter

thanen betr.

Washington, Oct. 14, 18 Sir, - Her Majesty's government were much concerned to find that No. 170. two British subjects, Mr. Patrick and Mr. Rahming, had been subjected to

britannien, arbitrary arrest, and, although they had learnt from a telegraphic despatch 14. Octobr. from me that Mr. Patrick had been released, they could not but regard the matter as one requiring their very serious consideration. Her Majesty's government perceive that when British subjects, as well as American citi. zens, are arrested, they are immediately transferred to a military prison, and that the military authorities refuse to pay obedience to a writ of habeas corpus. || Her Majesty's government conceive that this practice is directly opposed to the maxim of the constitution of the United States, that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." | Her Majesty's government are willing, however, to make every allowance for the hard necessities of a time of internal trouble, and they would not have been surprised if the ordinary securities of personal liberty had been temporarily suspended, nor would they have complained if British subjects falling under suspicion had suffered from the consequences of that suspension. But it does not appear that Congress has sanctioned in this respect any departure from the due course of law; and it is in these cir. cumstances that the law officers of the crown have advised her Majesty's government that the arbitrary arrests of British subjects are illegal. || So far as appears to her Majesty's government the Secretary of State of the United States exercises, upon the reports of spies and informers, the power of depriving British subjects of their liberty, of retaining them in prison, of liberating them by his own will and pleasure. Her Majesty's government cannot but regard this despotic aud arhitrary power as inconsistent with the constitution of the United States, as at variance with the treaties of amity subsisting between the two nations, and as tending to prevent the resort of British subjects to the United States for purposes of trade and industry. | Her Majesty's government have therefore felt bound to instruct me to remonstrate against irregular proceedings, and to say that in their opinion the authority of Congress is necessary in order to justify the arbitrary arrest and imprisoninent of British subjects. I have the honour, etc. The Hon. Wm. Seward, etc.

Lyons.

No. 171.

me

1861.

VEREINIGTE STAATEN. Min. d. Ausw. an den königl. grossbritannischen Gesandten. – Antwort auf die vorausgehende Reclamation wegen der Verhaf

tung britischer Unterthanen.

Department of State, Washington, Oct. 14., 186). No. 171. My Lord, -- I have the honour to acknowledge your lordship's note Vereinigte of the present date. In that paper you inform

that the 14. Octobr. British government is much concerned to find that two British subjects,

Mr. Patrick and Mr. Rahming, have been brougth under arbitrary arrest, and that although her Majesty's ministers have been advised by you of the release of Mr. Patrick, yet they cannot but regard the matter as requiring the very serious consideration of this government. You further inform me that her Majesty's government perceive that when British subects, as well as American citizens, are arrested, they are transferred to a military prison, and that the military authorities refuse to pay obedience to a writ of habeas corpus. You add that her Majesty's government conceive that this practice is directly opposed to the maxim of the constitution of the United States, that no person shall be deprived of live, liberty, or property without due process of law. You then obsersve that her Majesty's government are nevertheless willing to make every allowance for the hard necessities of a time of internal trouble, and they would not have been surprised if the ordinary securities of personal liberty had been temporarily suspended, nor would they have complained if British subjects, falling under suspicion had suffered from the consequences of that suspension, but that it does not appear that Congress has sanctioned in this respect any departure from the due course of law, and it is in these circumstances that the law officers of the crown have advised her Majesty's government that the arrests of British subjects are illegal. You remark, further, that so far as appears to her Majesty's government, the Secretary of State for the United States examines upon the reports of spies, and assumes the power of de. priving British subjects of their liberty, or liberating them by his own will and pleasure; and you inform me that her Majesty's government cannot but regard this despotic and arbitrary power as inconsistent with the constitution of the United States, as at variance with the treaties of amity subsisting between the two nations, and as tending to prevent the resort of British subjects to the United States for purposes of trade and industry. You conclude by informing me that upon these grounds her Majesty's government have felt bound to instruct you to remonstrate against such irregular proceedings, and to say that in their opinion the authority of Congress is necessary in order to justify the arbitrary arrest and imprisonment of British subjects.

The facts in regard to the two porsons named in your note are as follows: Communications from the regular police of the country to the Executive at Washington showed that disloyal persons in the State of Alabama were conducting treasonable correspondence with Confederates. British sub

1861.

jects and American citizens in Europe aimed at the overthrow of the Federal No. 171. Union by armed forces actually in the field, and besieging the capital of Vereinigte

Staaten, the United States. A portion of this correspondence, which was intercepted, 14.Octobr. was addressed to the firm of Smith and Patrick, brokers, long established, and doing business in the city of New York. It appeared that this firm had a branch at Mobile; that the partner Smith is a disloyal citizen of the United States, and that he was in Europe when the treasonable papers were sent from Mobile, addressed through the house of Smith and Patrick in New York. On receiving this information, William Patrick was arrested, and committed into military custody at Fort Lafayette, by an order of the Secretary of War of the United States, addressed to the police of the city of New York. These proceedings took place on the 28th of August last. | Representations were thereupon made to the Secretary of State by friends of Mr. Patrick, to the effect that, notwithstanding his associations, he was personally loyal to the government, and that he was ignorant of the treasonable nature of the correspondence which was being carried on through the mercantile house of which he was a member. Directions were thereupon given by the Secretary of State to a proper agent to inquire into the correctness of the facts thus presented, and this inquiry resulted in the establishment of their truth. Mr William Patrick was thereupon promptly released from custody by direction of the Secretary of State. This release occurred on the 13th day of September last. On the 2nd day of Sept. the superintendent of police in the city of New York informed the Secretary of State by telegraph that he had under arrest J. C. Rahming, who had just arrived from Nassau, where he had attempted to induce the owners of the schooner Arctic to take cannon to Wilmington, in North Carolina, for the use of the rebels, and inquired what he should do with the prisoner. J. C. Rahming was thereupon committed into military custody at Fort Lafayette under a mandate from the Secretary of State. This commitment was made on the 2nd day of September. On the 17th day of that month this prisoner, after due inquiry, was released from custody on his executing a bond in the penalty of 2,500 dols. with the condition that he should thereafter bear true allegiance to the United States, and do no act hostile or injurious to them while remaining under their protection. I have to regret that after so long an official intercourse between the governments of the United States and Great Britain, it should be necessary now to inform her Majesty's ministers that all executive proceedings, whether of the Secretary of War or of the Secretary of State, are, unless disavowed or revoked by the President, proceedings of the President of the United States.

Certainly it is not necessary to announce to the British government now that an insurrection, attended by civil and even social war, was existing in the United States when the proceedings which I have thus related took place. But it does seem necessary to state, for the information of that government, that Congress is by the constitution invested with no executive power or responsibility whatever; and, on the contrary, that the President of the United States is by the constitution and laws invested with the whole

[ocr errors]

1861.

No. 171. executive power of the government, and charged with the supreme direction Vereinigte of all municipal or ministerial civil agents, as well as of the whole land 14. Octobr. and naval forces of the Union; and that, invested with those ample powers,

he is charged by the constitution and laws with the absolute duty of suppressing insurrection, as well as preventing and repelling invasion; and that for these purposes he constitutionally exercises the right of suspending the writ of habeas corpus whenever and wheresoever and in whatsoever extent the public safety, endangered by treason or invasion in arms, in his judgment requires. The proceedings of which the British government complain were taken upon information conveyed to the President by the legal police authorities of the country, and they were not instituted until after he had suspended the great writ of freedom in just the extent that, in view of the perils of the State, he deemed necessary. | For the exercise of that discretion he, as well as his advisers, among whom are the Secretary of War and the Secretary of State, is responsible by law before the highest judicial tribunal of the Republic, and amenable also to the judgment of his countrymen, an the enlightened opinion of the civilised world. A candid admission contained in your letter relieves me ofany necessity for showing that the two persons named therein were neither known nor supposed to be British subjects when the proceedings occurred, and that in every case subjects of her Majesty residing in the United States, and under their protection, are treated during the present troubles in the same manner, and with no greater or less rigour than American citizens. The military pri son which was used for the temporary detention of the suspected parties is a fort constructed and garrisoned for the public defence. The military officer charged with their custody has declined to pay obedience to the writ of habeas corpus, but the refusal was made in obedience to an express direction of the President in the exercise of his functions as commander-in-chief of all the land and naval forces of the United States. || Although it is not very important, it certainly is not entirely irrelevant to add hat, so far as I am informed, no writ of habeas corpus was attempted to be served or was even issued out or applied for in behalf of either of the persons named, although in a case not dissimilar the writ of habeas corpus was issued out in favour of another British subject, and was disobeyed by direction of the President.

The British government have candidly conceded in the remonstrance before me that even in this country, so remarkable for so long an enjoyment by its people of the highest immunities of personal freedom, war, and especially civil war, cannot be conducted exclusively in the forms and with the dilatory remedies provided by municipal laws which are adequate to the preservation of public order in time of peace. Treason always operates if possible by surprise, and prudence and humanity therefore equally require that violence concocted in secret shall be prevented if practicable by unusual and vigorous precaution. I am fully aware of the inconveniences which result from the practice of such precaution, embarrassing communities in social life, and affecting perhaps trade and intercourse with foreign nations. But the American people, after having in every way tried to avert

[ocr errors]

1861.

civil war, have accepted it at last as a stern necessity. The chief interest No. 171. while it lasts is not enjoyments of society or the profits of trade, but the Vereinigte

Staaten, saving of the national life. That life saved, all the other blessings which 14. Octobr. attend will speedily return with the greater assurance of continuance than ever before. The safety of the whole people has become in the present emergency the supreme law, and so long as the danger shall exist, all classes of society equally, the denizen and the citizen, must cheerfully acquiesce in the measures which that law prescribes. This government does not question the learning of the legal advisers of the British crown, or the justice of the deference which her Majesty pays to them. Nevertheless the British government will hardly expect that the President will accept their explanation of the constitution of the United States, especially when the constitution thus expounded would leave upon him the sole executive responsibility of suppressing the existing insurrection, while it would transfer to Congress the most material and indispensable power to be employed for that purpose. Moreover, these explanations find no real support in the letter, much less in the spirit, of the constitution itself. He must be allowed, therefore, to prefer to be governed by the view of our organic national law which, while it will enable him to execute his great trust with complete success, receives the sanction of the highest authorities of our country, and is sustained by the general consent of the people for whom alone that constitution was established. I avail myself etc. The Right Hon. Lord Lyons, &c.

W. H. Seward.

Own

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Gross

1861.

[ocr errors]

No. 172.
GROSSBRITANNIEN. Verbote der Ausfuhr von Schiesspulver und zu dessen

Bereitung dienenden Stoffen.

By tle QUEEN-A PROCLAMATION. VICTORIA, R, Whereas in and by a certain statute, made and No. 172. passed in the Parliament held in the 16th and 17th years of our reign, and

britannien, intituled ,,The Customs Consolidation Act, 1853," it is, among other things, 30. Novbr. declared and enacted as follows, that is to say: - The following goods may, by Proclamation or Order in Council, be prohibited either to be exported or carried coastwise Arms, ammunition, and gunpowder, military and naval stores, and any articles which Her Majesty shall judge capable of being converted into or made useful in increasing the quantity of military or naval stores, provisions, or any sort of victual which may be used as food by man; and if any goods so prohibited shall be exported from the United Kingdom or carried coastwise, or be water-borne to be so exported or carried, they shall be forfeited. And whereas we have thought fit, by and with the advice of our Privy Council, to prihibit either to be exported or carried coastwise the articles hereinafter mentioned (being articles which we judge capable of being converted into or made useful in increasing the quantity of military or naval stores), we therefore, by and with the advice of our Privy Council, and by this our Royal Proclamation, do order and direct that, from and after the date hereof, all gunpowder, saltpetre, nitrate

[ocr errors]
« EelmineJätka »