^ 1^^ '^' «o.

h>^

IMAGE EVALUATtON
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

I.I

11.25

2|8 1 2.5
■^ 1^ i2.2

•^ -->. I

u 124

Its

L£ 12.0

MJ4

U 11.6

^>.

<^#

Photographic

Sciences

Corporation

23 WEST M;JN STP1:ET

WEBSTER, N.Y. :4>80

(716) 872-4103

v-gU

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CiHM/iCIVIH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibiiographlcally unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

D
D

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

j I Covers damaged/

Couverture endommagde

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul^e

r~~] Cover title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

I I Coloured maps/

Cartes g6ographiques en couleur

Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/

Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with other material/
Relid avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La re liure serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge intirieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certalnes pages blanches ajouties
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
male, iorsque cela 6talt possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t6 filmies.

L'Institut a microfilm^ le mellleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sent peut-Atre uniques du
point de vue bibllographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reprodulte, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la methods normale de fllmage
sont indlqute cl-dessous.

□ Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

D
D

Pages damaged/
Pages endommastos

Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restaur6es et/ou pelllculies

Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages d^colortes. tacheties ou piqu^es

Pages detached/
Pages d^tachtes

Showthrough/
Transparence

I I Quality of print varies/

Quality inigale de I'impression

Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel supplAmentaire

Only edition available/
Seule MItlon dlsponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc.. have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible Image/
Les pages totalement ou partieliement
obscurcles par un feulllet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6t6 fllmtes A nouveau de fa9on d
obtenir la mellleure Image possible.

The
tot

The
pos
oft
film

Ori|
beg
the
sioi
oth
firs
sioi
ori

The
sha
TIN
whi

Ma
diff
ent
beg
rigf
req
me'

Additional comments:/
Commentaires suppl6mehtalres:

Fold out ii a photoreproduction.

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est fllmi au taux de rMuctlon IndiquA cl-dessous.

10X

14X

18X

22X

26X

30X

12X

16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:

Library of the Public
Archives of Canada

L'exemplaire filmt fut reproduit grAce A la
g6n4rosit6 de:

La bibliothdque des Archives
publiques du Canada

The Imafjfic appearing here are the best quelity
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and In keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

Les Images suivantes ont 4t6 reproduites avec ie
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de la nettet^k de rexemplaire f iimi, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated Impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated Impression.

Les exemplaires orlginaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprimde sont fiim^s en commen9ant
par Ie premier plat et en terminant soit par la
dernlAre page qui compote une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration. soit par Ie second
plat, salon ie cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
orlginaux sont filmte en commen^ant par la
premiere page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol ^»> (meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol y (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

Un des symboles sulvants apparaftra sur la
derniire Image de cheque microfiche, selon Ie
cas: Ie symbols —► signifie "A SUIVRE". Ie
symbols V signifie "FIN".

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included In one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre
filmte A des taux de reduction diff6rents.
Lorsque Ie document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul cilch6, 11 est film6 d psrtir
de Tangle sup6rleur gauche, de gauche A droite,
et de haut en bas. en prenant Ie nombre
d'images nicessaire. Les diagrammes sulvants
lllustrent la m6thode.

1 2 3

CASE OF W M'LEOD,

CASE OF M? M'LEOD,

m WHOSE PEKSON

THE CROWN OF GREAT BRITAIN

IS ARRAIGNED FOR FELONY.

** ^arliameikts may ruin, but never s4ve a State."

Sir W. Temple.

Wtn lEHmon^ (rebi^eH.)

DAVID URQUHART, Esq.

COUPLAND AND Co., SOUTHAMPTON;

AND

LONGMAN AND Co., LONDON.

V " m

1841.

LONDON :
PRINTED BY T. BRETTELL, nUVERT STREET, HAYMARKET.

NB. — The case of Mr. M^I^eod is subsidiary to the ques-
tion of the Boundary Diflerences. It is a link in a chain;
it is of importance solely in connection with that chain.
Taken by itself it can only bewilder and confuse. By
itself (as every other diplomatic transaction) it is in-
comprehensible.

CONTENTS.

PAGE

Preface to the Second Edition vii

Note to the Third Edition . xix

PART I.
Statement of the Case of Mr. M'^Leod 22

PART II.

Correspondence between the British Envoy and the
American Secretary of State, relative to the Seizure
of Mr. McLeod , . . 32

PART III.

Debate in the House of Commons 53

PART IV.

Pjiralfel Case of Boundary Differences 72

PART V.

Interests compromised Abroad, Constitution subverted at
Home, by the House of Commons 82

Postscript . 113

I'oNTlENTS.

APPENDIX.

PAGE

N„, !.__« The gigantic sclicmes of ambition revealed by
England in every quarter of the Globe."

No. II. -Extract from Mr. Adams's Letter to the
Spanish Government, November 28, 1818 ....

No Ill.-Contemporary Statement of the Case of the
Caroline, in a New York Newspaper, the " Courier and

Inquirer

No. IV.- Papers presented to Congress relative to the
Arrest of Mr. M'Leod, on account of the Burning of the
Steamer " Caroline"

No. v.— Discussion in Pariiament, House of Lords,
Feb. 8, 1P41

^0. VI. — Boundary Question, House of Commons,
July 13th, 1840 •

No. VII.— Negociations respecting the Boundary sub-
sequently to breaking the Award, as given in Papers
marked I. and II

No. VIII.— Extract Trom " The Crisis" L57

125
127

128

131

137
151

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.

The seizure oi Mr. M'^Leod appears to Great
Britain merely as an accident. It is not in any
degree attributed to human will ; it is not dreamed
of as conducing to further any existing political
design. It is believed that the British Minister
had, in this matter, nothing further to do than to
consider that which the American Government had

done.

In the following pages it is shown that this event
is not an accident ; that it has been prepared for,
and therefore has been brought about, and that not
by the will of the United States— that it does tend
to the advancement of a political design — not a
design of the United States ; that it is the British
Minister who has prepared this position; and his
object in doing so is explained by the interests of
Russia — he, by the examination of other facts,
having been shown to be the instrument of that

VIU

iMa:i'A( i') 10

power, it is then inferred that the object, with
II view to which tlie United States' Government
was inveigled into this position, was to furnish
the British Minister with the opportunity of
driving it back again; by this to augment the
ill-will already implanted in the breasts of the
two nations, and to increase the complications in
which the two Governments have already been
involved, by a similar process brought to bear upon
the Boundary Differences. .

It is for the reader to weigh well tlie conse-
quences of such a position, if that, here assumed,
is true ; and then it is for him to examine the proof
upon which it rests.

The debate of the 8th and 9th February, ex-
hibited the Foreign Minister as justifying the
proceedings of the United States, and informed this
nation that the steps which the Government had
taken, were nothing more than the repetition of the
dispatches already sent to America, which amounted
solely to the admission of the legality of the pro-
ceedings, and of the authority of the tribunal. In
face of these facts, I declared that the British
Minister was not about to submit but was only
enticing the American Government on. A few days
after this declination was in print,, was it made

THE SECOND EDITION. IX

known that the British Government had taken
a decided line — had dttermined to enforce the
liberation of Mr. M<=Leod without trial*, and that it
was about to send out a squadron to enforce that
demand.

Now that this intelligence has been made public,
war is supposed to be inevitable. I have already
asserted in these pages, my belief that the moment
for war was not comef. I have said this, observing
the attitude of Russia, knowing that it was in a
just estimate of her movements that I could alone
find the means of anticipating events.

* See the words of Sir R. Peel in the House of Commons on
the 5th of March — or is this too a false rumour ?

t The time is not come for war, both because the cup of hatred
is not full, and because the means of destruction are not sufficient.
But now will come on — arming of America — raising of fortresses
— drawing out of militia — founding of cannon — equipping and
building of ships— augmentation of troops; and this load of
military preparations, while preparing for inter-destruction with
neighbours, will also be preparing for political dissolution at
home. The Treaty of the 15th of July has already added more
than 500,000 men to the peace establishments of Central Europe,
(Germany, Italy, and France). It has already cost Europe
£.50,000,000, and has added ten millions yearly to the regular
expenditure of those states. The pretext for this measure was the
maintenance of the integrity of the Ottoman Empire — which the
act itself dismembers^ and the Divan is now no more than the
counterpart of the secret Muscovite Conclave in Downing Street,
tliat for ten years has tortured the world.

PREFACE TO

Intelligence of a final settlement of the Eastern
question was spread abroad at the same moment
that it was allowed to become known that these
decisive measures were taken with respect to the
United States ; it was also at the same time
spread abroad, that, in the new adjustment of the
affairs of the East, France would be a consenting
party. A few days after, we learn that the affairs
of the East are as unsettled as ever, and another
cloud has passed over the French alliance. The
moment of sunshine was then called in for a
purpose — the purpose of reconciling England to
the decided measures against the United States,
and of overawing the United States by the ap-
pearance of the union of Europe with England,
when she expected to hear of rupture and collision.
These will be followed soon by rumours in another
sense, for the end is to confuse the minds of men,
and to complicate affairs.

To France (from whom a recent Quadruple
Treaty was withheld) the English Government com-
municated first (so at least the public press informs
us), its intention of requiring imperatively from the
United States the liberation of Mr. M'^Leod, with-
out trial, and of sending a squadron to enforce that
demand. A few days afterwards the Paris papers

THE SECOND EDITION.

mention long and frequent conferences between tlie
United States Envoy and the French Minister.

Independently of the progressive march of hos-
tility between the United States and England, ob-
serve the effect of this blow, levelled by England
at her own friends — at the very moment of their
accession. The new administration, the new Pre-
sident, the party which in the United States is the
natural ally of England, comprising the men of
worth, and known for the thoughts of value, are at
once placed in flagrant opposition to England, and
through them is to be levelled by England this
immedicable wound.

So in the Treaty of the 15th July was the blow
struck by England at the Minister in France, who,
before his nation, in the most extraordinary and
absolute manner, had committed himself to an
" English Alliance," and to an " English Alliance
alone*."

* M. Thiers, in replying to the proposition that it was the in-
terest of France to ally herself with Russia in her projects of
partition, uses these words :— " In this state of our affairs, with
whom was it our duty to have allied ourselves ? With England,
and ONLY WITH Eng: and. * * What nation is interested in
preventing Russia obtaining possession of Constantinople ? Is it
not England ? In the resistance, therefore, of France to Russia,
England becomes, and necessarily must remain, our ally. When
France is united to England, who can resist, and what can en-

■;,?■

PREFACE TO

At the period of M. Thiers*s accession to office, I
prognosticated his fall by the act of England, I
did so knowing the objects of Russia, and her
instruments. It was important to strike a blow
at any friend of England, and how much more at
the friend of England in France, It was important
to make England injure France any how ; but how
much more so in the person of the man who had
compromised himself as the friend of England.
Then, by the same blow, is France alienated from
England — is the chief friend of England in France
destroyed — is he converted into a foe — and foreign
influence gains the power to make and to unmake
a Government*! These words will not be now

danger ? Our joint standard will float over the world, inscribed
with the motto * Liberty and Peace.* "

Debate^ \Oth January^ 1840.
* " Thus the French Government, in assaulting England (by
the blockade of Mexico), has violated its own laws— has defied
the power of its own tribunals, and, in this course of iniquity, it
is supported by the Minister of England. The Eitssian Minister
of England finds means to support the Russian faction at Paris
against the violation of French law, as against the infraction of
British rights ; against the decisions of a French tribunal, as
against the law of nations ; against the people and the parlia-
ment of France, he supports them by the people and the parlia-
ment of England, whom he appears to represent, and whom
he moulds to his will. Thus does England render triumphant
her enemies in the French councils. Thus does she confirm
France in a course of hostility to England. Thus does she render

THE SECOND EDITION.

XIU

I
I

understood, but they stand on record for the time
when they will.

Look now at the contrast. Under Marshal Soult,
before the accession of M. Thiers, France has
prepared alone to resist Russia ; the successor of
M. Thiers, brought in by England, is actually
taking the lead in the accomplishment of that pro-
ject of Russia (the exclusion of Europe from the
Dardanelles), which, when first whispered in the
Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi, united France and Eng-
land in a protest against her !

Again it will be asked, as on every such occa-
sion, " how is it, even if we could admit the guilt
" of the minister, that the chiefs of the other party
" and his colleagues can be blind to such danger, or
" can be ignomnt of such facts ? " No step can be
taken by the Foreign Minister except in as far as he
blinds these men, but these men are blind — the

it impossible for any French statesman* friendly to England to
come into power, or coming into power, to remain her friend.
No one can remain friendly to a power that has become the
enemy of itself. Therefore, those who have been the friends of
England must now become her bitterest foes because betrayed,
and her foes become possessed of her senseless people's unsus-
pecting confidence." — Conversation 8M Fehruarj/^ 1840. Diplo-
macy <ind Commerce.

* " M. Thiers was excluded from office, because he had de-
clared alliance with England, the chief end of the foreign policy
of France." lie lias since come into office, and has been expelled
by En ff land.

XIV

PREFACE TO

nation is blinded by them — how can it be taught
to see their blindness except by gaining sight, that
is, knowledge of affairs ?

The Treaty of the 15th July, was enforced on
this Nation, on the Parliament, on the colleagues of
the Minister, on the Sovereign. They resisted —
nevertheless, the thing was done ; no sooner was it
done, than they all commended it. The means hy
which the Foreign Minister carried out his objects
are not known to the nation, and the act being
adopted, they care not about the means*. The
means by which it is led, not to act only, but to
believe, are kept secret from a people thinking

* The following remarkable language appeared in the columns
of an organ hitherto attached to the policy of Lord Palmerston,
on the publication of the documents connected with the Treaty of
15th July.

" The zeal with which we have hitherto defended the foreign
policy of Lord Palmerston would have been somewhat abated
had we been aware of many of those Downing Street secrets
which are now revealed to us. Though prepared to find Lord
Palmerston acting in concert with Russia, it required the pub-
lication of these official papers to convince us of the extent to
which his Lordship lent himself to promote the views of that

wily and unscrupulous Power."

*********

" Is it then possible that Lord Palmerston could so betray
the interests of this country as to enter into a collusive negociation
with Russia, flinging the dust of spurious patriotism into the eyes
of the British people, while actually engaged in abandoning the
Turkish capital to Russian protection ?" &c. — The Sun^ April 21,

THE SECOND EDITION.

itself to be free, and these are successful by
secrecy alone. Thus a free people is governed
with a secrecy, unknown to the most despotic
states. The day before the Treaty of the 15th
July was signed, the Foreign Minister was looked
upon as the enemy of Russia-— he suddenly ap-
pears adopting her views. No one questions why
the change, and no one opposes it. Had any one,
even an hour before it was known to exist, declared
that such a treaty was in existence, or in contempla-
tion, he would have been called mad*. The fact
occurs, and every one is content

It is only a blind man that can be led ; but even
being blind, some cord, however slender, must be
used to lead him. The method of leading a blind
nation, which has been adopted on one occasion,
must serve, if we can ascertain it, to enlighten us as
to how it is to be on other occasions conducted.

The following is one of those slender threads by
which this empire has been dragged into the Treaty
of the 16th of July : —

France under a minister who was a partisan of

* When it wa? first asserted that this Treaty did exist, the
leading journal of the day said that England would ^rise like a
single man, and tear it like a mesh of rushes. Tvn6 days after-
wards, it was advocating the Treaty. j

XVI

PREFACE TO

Russia, had made to Russia propositions for a
project of common partition to tlie exclusion of
England. Russia places these proposals in the
hands of Lord Palmerston. To doubts arising
in the minds of important personages regard-
ing the policy of the Treaty of 15th July, he
is thus enabled to reply : — " I can give you
" the proof — I can put into your hands incon-
" trovertible evidence of the devotion of Rus-
" sia to England; of the hostility of France to
England ; of the necessity of union with Russia
against France, to prevent a union of France
" and Russia against England. Here is a
" proposition from France made to Russia,
" and placed by the loyalty of Russia in my
** possession*." This communication has not
to be made to many persons. It is made in the
strictest secrecy, and thus it reaches far. Through
the leaders it influences whole bodies ', it controls
both parties through one man. The nation seeing
parliament silent— hostile leaders acquiescing — is
silent too, and acquiesces. This device produces
these effects simply because it is secret.

* See " The Crisis," an extract from which will be found in
the Appendix, No. VIII.

THE SECOND EDITION.

XVll

In the present instance like means may be adopted,
if indeed, by success in regard to the Treaty of the
15th July, in lulling suspicion, and in committing
all men to his acts, he is not placed in a position
so commanding as to enable him to dispense with
such means of deception. Still the same tactics may
be again repeated here; Russia may have led the
United States, or some members of the United
States, to some proposition of concert with her
against England*. She would then place in Lord
Palmerston's hands these new proofs of her devo-
tion and of his loyalty. These, as in the former
instance, he entrusts (if necessary) to a few indivi-

* Extract from a Letter ; fcr the accuracy of the state-
ments I cannot vouch.

" March Mth.

*< Russia, I understand, put Government in possession
of the fact of the American offer (of naval aid to Russia
in case of a rupture with England) ten days ago, and Lord
Falmerston intends to bring the fact forward to the House
after Easter. Lord Palmerston's demands for the release of
Mr. M^Leod are peremptory ; and that, if not immediately
acceded to, Mr Fox returns home !

" Lord Falmerston would thus be again strengthened
by this exhibition of his watchfulness, of his able policy in
settling the friendship of Russia, while it establishes her
fair, friendly, and honourable conduct * in the hour of
' need,"* as Baron Brunow stated at the dinner. How ad-
mirably all this is played !

XVlll

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.

cluals — nay, say to one individual; and, by this
alone, overthrows all possible resistance. Far
from opposition, suspicion, denunciation, punish-
ment — another act of applauding submission on
the part of the nation is ensured — a repetition of
endurance of what is incomprehensible, followed
by a conclusion which this infatuated nation will
call a triumph.

It is understood that the Government has re-
quested from the Duke of Wellington, a plan of
campaign against the United States.

XIX

Note to the Third Edition.

April 23rd,

Again another month has elapsed, and the servant
of the British Crown remains still in an American
gaol on a charge of felony, for the performance of
an act now publicly acknowledged to be the act of
the British Government !

This nation has further learnt, with indifference
or with resignation, that he is to lie there for a
further period of six months, awaiting a trial.

The British nation is familiarized to submission,
to outrage, and to uncertainty. The United States
is habituated to the infliction of outrage on Great
Britain 5 and the sore is kept open and festering,
to be envenomed by, and to envenom, the running
sores of Asia and of Europe. But is not this —
punishment — without trial? Is not this a trial
which is a condemnation ?

Again, since the last edition of this Pamphlet, has
the Foreign Secretary relieved the American Go-
vernment from all anxiety in the prosecution of the
course into which he has led it. He has refused to
produce the correspondence relative to the destruc-
tion of the Caroline*.

It must be evident to each individual that there
was now no difficulty in bringing the American

See Appendix, page 150.

NOTE TO

Government to setttle this question, and that it
required but the expression of a determination that
it should be settled.* Yet this is the moment that
the British Ministers selects for refusing the docu-
ments, and for assigning as a reason for their
refusal the pacific dispositions of " both Govern-
ments," and for urging moderation on the British

* The tone of public feeling in the United States may be
appreciated from the following extract from the press of that
country.

" The Pbooress op British Arms."

*' So far as our own people are concerned, it is their duty to
know, and to note the immense increase of British Power within
a few years. Let those who in this country stimulate war,
ponder upon its dreadful consequences, and the terrible power
with which we shall have to struggle. Let those too who most
cry " war," be pinned by solemn bond to serve in such a war.
Let the frontier too know, that, in all probability, from Detroit
to Burlington, not a town nor village near the line would escape,
if not conflagration, the tramp and the sack of the British
soldier. Let the seaboard also know, that it is easier, with the
rapid aid of steam power now, to lay Boston, New York,
Baltimore, and Charleston in ashes, than Beyrout or Jean
d' Acre— for three or four years of rout and disaster only can
prepare us for war or give us the defences of war.

" A war between England and the United States is, therefore,
a suicide, as well as a fratricide. We have no patience with the
unnatural oflFspring of a common origin that cry for it. The
difficult questions we have to settle, must be adjusted with the
forbearance and kindness of, as it were homehold disputes. If
England be ambitious for wrongful power, it must be sought for
among the Barbarians of Asia, or in the Islands of the ocean —
not here, among its oflFspring, who have inherited its valour, and
learnt its lessons of wrong and right."— iVew York Weekly
Express.

THE THIRD EDITION.

XXI

Parliament and nation, which had demanded and
suggested nothing ; and which has, indeed, already
forgotten that such a person as Mr. M^Leod is in
existence, and awaits for the interest of excitement
that may be afforded it by some more novel incedcnt
of degradation and dishonour.

There is no escape from the present dilemma, save
in the surrender of Mr. M'^Leod : — there is no other
possible settlement. This if witliheld could be ob-
tained only by evincing the determination of Eng-
land to enforce it. Instead of this, the British
Ministers puts the two Governments on the same
level, he designates the dispositions of the British
Government as pacific, the man not being liberated,
and he describes the position of the two Governments
as one of pending negociation. Does not this
coincide with the process we have traced throughout
the remainder of this proceeding ? Does it not
confirm the explanation of it which we have
offered ? Does it not reveal equal dexterity in com-
plicating affairs, and success in compromising a
Parliament, and in blinding a people ?

Every one now admits that Lord Palmerston has
stated what was false in regard to this affair, but no
one asks himself why the British Minister should
have stated what was false — no one is filled with
indignation that a British Minister should utter a
falsehood, or conceives such a state of things to be
dangerous. This could not be if common honesty
had not left the land; we need not marvel then
that common sense should have departed.

PART I.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE OF MR. M«^LEOD*.

" To neglect those things to which your lives and fortunes
should bo devoted, is most reprehensible ; yet you never attend
but on occasions like this, when danger is actually present."

DEMOSTnENBS.

A British subject is arraigned before the Court
of a Foreign State for acts performed in discharge of
his public duty. He is placed in a malefactor's cell,
as an accessory, where the Sovereign of England is
the principal.

Hordes overrun, savages massacre, and pirates
plunder, through the power of which they are
possessed, and because there is no help for their
victims, and these things have been seen in many
ages ; but it has been reserved for the present to
exhibit lawless phrenzy putting on the foriiis of
law, and weakness outraging imperial majesty !
Is it in the Old World or in the New, that
hearts have been found to conceive such a de-
sign, and hands to execute it? Is it the young

* See Appendix, Nos. II. and III.; see also Colonial Magaziney
August, 1840.

Statement of the Case of Mr. M'Leod. 23

republic of Anglo-Saxons, that by some strange
revolution in human aHairs, or in human thoughts,
has acquired a real power, by which the might of
Britain can thus be defied, or some mysterious fasci-
nation by which its manhood can be unstrung P Or,
is it within the British empire itself that the project
has been conceived ? Is there there some enemy dis-
guised within the most secret folds and forms of the
constitution, stabbing it in the dark, while using its
power to spread hatred for the British name, to
rouse up enemies to the Briti. .1 State, and thus
secure immunity for crime — success to treason ?

In December 1837, a party of outlaws, principally
citizens of the United States, and formed within its
limits, proceeded to assault the British territory.
They came with ammunition, with artillery be-
longing to the United States, and they were sup-
plied from the opposite shore by a steam-vessel.
This vessel, whilst lying in a harbour of the United
States, was attacked by a party of British troops,
and destroyed. The British Governmfnt made
no demand for satisfaction for this invasion. The
American Government demanded reparation for
an alleged violation of its territory. The British
Government gave no reply. Bills of indictment
for murder and arson are filed in the courts of
New York against the chie*" civil authorities of
the Province of Upper Canada. Eighteen months
elapse, when the British Minister is informed that
the American Government is about to take criminal

Statement of the Case

proceedings against individuals connected with that
enterprise. Instructions are sent to the Envoy of
Great Britain at Washington, to protest against
the act of the American Government after it should
have been committed, and so as to jv^^'ify the act.
The expected case does not occur. A further period
of eighteen months elapses — the British Government
gives no reply to the demand of the American Go-
vernment for redress— takes no notice of the bills
of indictment against th^ servants of the British
Crown. Two years and eleven months elapse,
and in November 1840, the Deputy-Sheriff of the
County of New Brunswick, adjoining the scene of
action, ia arrested and committed to prison to take
his trial on the charge of arson and murder.

The burning of the Caroline was either an
act of self-defence, or it was a crime uniting
murder, piracy, and arson. The British Govern-
ment had at once to assume it as its own, or to
afford to the United States reparation by the
punishment of its perpetrators. If it was not an
act of the British Government, it was an assault
on its authority. Being against the subjects of
a foreign state, the British Government had to
demand reparation for the acts which had called it
forth, or by reparation to have emancipated itself
from the consequences of an act so atrocious.
There was no middle course.

But the destruction of the Caroline was not the
act of private individuals, it was an operation per-
formed by public servants under authority.

of Mr. M'Leod.

The Government of the United States had judged
the men occupying Navy Island to be outlaws.
No American citizen could, therefore, be guilty of
tnurder in killing these men, nor guilty of arcon in
destroying the vessel. The destruction of these men,
as of their vessel, was an act not reprehensible, even
if not required in self-protection. By what code,
therefore, can the subjects of a foreign state be
arraigned for arson or for murder ? If that court
has judged defence against outlaws to be murder,
it is a court established for the destrucil m of law,
not for the dispensation of justice — for the perpe-
tration of piracy, not for the protection of men.
Tiiis charge of murder and arson converts the
court into the violator of the laws of the United
States — of international law, and places it in
"flagrant hostility with the government of the
United States. But this court arraigns, as felons,
not private individuals but officers of a govern-
ment — it is, then, war that it wages, not justice
that it asserts.

On the other hand, the British Government leaves
in suspense the act of its servants, in seizing a
vessel in the harbour of another state — it leaves
hanging over their heads, duiing three years, a
charge of felony ! This, indeed, is incomprehensible,
and must arouse the most vehement indignation
or the most alarming suspicions.

The d'*Tiand of the United States was for repa-
ration for the violation of the neutrality of its territory.

Statement of the Case

If the neutrality of iti territory was violated by the
capture, must it not have been so by the presence of
the Caroline? "Neutrality!'^ Pirates on the one
hand, and a government on the other, and the
United States speak of neutrality ? Pirates and out-
laws issue from its frontier, armed with its weapons,
unresisted by its authority, to assault a friendly
neighbour, and when these outlaws are repressed,
it declares its neutrality violated, it pursues as felons
the officers who exterminated the band, that assailing
the one country had compromised the other ? You
are astounded at such a proceeding ; but why do I
thus present it to you ? Not to lead you to think
harshly or to speak insultingly of the American people
or state, oyer whom you have no control, and who
owe to you no duty and no responsibility ; but to
show to you the characters of the act submitted to
and sanctioned by your government, in order that
you may judge of the conduct of men who are your
servants, to whom you give power, from whom you
can withdraw it, whom you guide by your opinion,
whom you recompense or punish, according to your
knowledge of public affairs and of their acts. If
they have done amiss, they have been able to do so
through your power, that is, through your igno-
rance; for in their mismanagement, there could
be no strength except by your concurrence.

England, by not rnaking a demand for reparation
for the aggressions proceeding from the United
States, left the character of the seizure of the vessel

iii?

of Mr, M'Leod,

open to discussion : by submitting in silence to
THE DEMAND FOR REPARATION from America, she
gave her pragmatic consent to the assertion, made by
the Government of the United States, that that act
wras one of piracy. The United States Government, in
demanding reparation, committed an outrage on Eng-
land ; and the English Government, by its silence,
acquiesced in that outrage, and became a party to it.
Here was a demand that was an outrage to Britain
— sanctioned: here was a constructive insult so
flimsy as to invite refutation — submitted to: here
was an assertion which suspended over the head
of B.itain the charge of arson and of murder
— admitted : here was a step of the United States
Oovernment, which converted into a crime of Great
Britain against the United States, that which was a
crime of the United States against Great Britain —
not unresisted, but encouraged. This is what your
Minister has brought about, because England knew
nothing of these transactions, or of any such trans-
actions, and could not, in the first instance, obtain
or select a Minister that was able, and could not
then detect or punish one that was criminal.

What would be said of leaving a simple dispatch
for three years unreplied to ? But in such a matter,
with such consequences impending, such interests
iiivolved, such charges alleged, not three years, but
three days* silence, it would be impossible to ac-
count for, as men account for the doubtful acts of
men. Will you attempt to account for it by neg-

i
I

Statement of the Case

ligence, by ignorance, by incapacity ? The existence
of a government implies the performance of, at
least, some functions — the existence of a nation, the
maintenance of some rights. All idea of functions
— of rights must have vanished from the mind of
him who could conceive that such acts are to
be explained by characters in the system, rather
than to be traced to a design against it*. He must
have reasoned to the conclusion, if he reasoned at
all, that England was the name of an island, but
that that word no longer designated a Government,
or represented a nation. Look at the reciprocal
position of the two parties to this transaction ; per-
sonify the two Governments , represent to yourself
that of the United States, standing in an attitude of
menace, uttering words of outrage, giving vent to
denunciation of crime, making demand for satisfac-
tion ; and, on the other hand, the Government of
the British Empire, not only innocent but the ag-
grieved party, standing silent to be reproached— and
powerful to be insulted ; and throwing away right
and power, self-respect, the respect of others, in-
curring these reproaches, incurring this danger,
seeing all this before it, and not moving a muscle,
nor stirring a limb, nor suffering a sound to escape
from its lips, when a single sound sufficed to do all
that it had to do, and avert all that it had to appre-

* " These men are guilty, but our constitution is not, therefore,
subverted."— Demostfsniss.

of Mr. M'Leod,

hend ! Is this nation composed of such men as
have hitherto composed nations, when a Govern-
ment could assume such a position, and when
that position is exhibited before their eyes, and is
not understood?

Thus, during three years, has the United States
Government been left in possession of the faculty
of treating the subjects of the British crown as
guilty of felony, and of proceeding against the
British State. Three years have been given t »
ponder over the mystery of the minister of Eng-
land, over the mystery of its people. During three
years, their attention has been thus more peculiarly
aroused to watch the progress of the gigantic
schemes of ambition revealed by England in every
quarter of the globe* ; while their mind is directed
hopefully during that period to the growth of the
projects and the revelation of the designs of Eng-
land's Russian foe ! Finally, they have witnessed
a sudden explosion of mutual hostility in England
and in France, destroying security, withering hope,
and opening to both a clouded future of common dan-
ger, disaster, and decay. It is after this preparation
undergone, and theseevents witnessed, that the United
States proceeded to arraign a servant of the British
crown for murder and arson !

America looked with respect to England ; Nature
yearned in the bowels of the young republican'^

See Appendix, No. I.

Statement of the Case

for the land of their fathers* graves; heedless and
indifterent were thoy to all questions of European
policy. This has been the labour, this the task, to
lead them to despise and then to hate England, to
lead them to be excited in regard to European and
diplomatic affairs, and to think they have com-
prehended them, and thereby to be drawn within
the vortex in which the Cabinet of St. Petersburgh
sweeps round thoughts, fortune, and events*.

^ At the present moment that throughout Europe, Asia, and
America, Russia is no longer predominant merely ir repressing
resistance, but predominant in the command of the active co-
operation of all the states and nations — at this period of more
intense exultation for her than when her positive dominion shall
be established, the only sign of a spirit still dwelling in men, and
of thoughts or hopes of freedom still preserved throughout the
earth, reaches us from the shores of Circassia, where a handful of
mountaineers at once defeats her armies and defies her influence.
Whence this strange contrast in them — and this mighty reproach
for us? These people have no government, no press — ^these
people have no legislating assemblies. In the few hours which I
lived on the shores of Circassia, one of the subjects of most earnest
debate was the means to establish something like a government, and
the effect of it, when established. Haji Oglou, the judge of Soud-
jak Kale district, in debating the question in an assembly of elders,
used these words : — ■' If a government were established it
would require Russia only to get possession of that government,
or of two or three men in it, whether by corrupting them, or by
deceiving them, to destroy our independence. Turkey is infinitely
more powerftil than we are : with a slender portion of her strength,
the materials for instance contained in 'iwo or three line-of-battle-
"hips, we could defy the po^er of Russia, and yet Turkey sinks

of Mr, M'Leod,

before Rusbia, and we stand erect. We are, therefore, warned
by this, and we say to ourselves, * better is it perhaps to strug-
gle as we struggle, than to have a government through which
Russia could attack us, not as now with arms that we see, but
as with a disease for which there b no cure.' "

That disease is now in the heart of every man belonging to
the Gothic race.

PART II.

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE BRITISH ENVOY
AND THE AMERICAN SECRETARY OF STATE,
RELATIVE TO THE SEIZURE OF MR. M'^LEOD.

" I hope, Sir, when those papers are produced, that their
contents will not be partial, meagre, and unsatisfactory; that
they will not be confined merely to the correspondence of the
negociating parties, but that they will indicate the views and
policy of the Government." — Lobd Palmerston, February 5thf
1830.

On the seizure of Mr. M^'Leod, the British En-
voy at Washington acts upon the instructions pre-
viously sent. Mr. Fox remonstrates, but his
reiiionstrance serves only to draw from the United
States' Government a declaration which compro-
mises it against Great Britain — which relieves the
state of New York from all separate responsibility,
encourages it to persevere, and renders the general
Government a party to its acts ; while, on separate
grounds, it identifies that Government with these
proceedings. Therefore is the correspondence laid
on the table of the House of Congress, as justifying
the conduct of the Government, and supporting its
case. But as this unfortunate proceeding had
taken place before there was a possibility of re-

Correspondence f <5fc.

ceiving instructions from home, the Envoy must
have been supposed to have acted without any, and
to this his failure would be attributed. What would
you say if this step was taken by instructions — if
the British Government had, long before, anticipated
such a contingency, and had sent out instructions
to its Envoy to do what he has done ? What
would you say if, after the catastrophe, the British
minister should come down to the House of Com-
mons to declare that Mr. Fox had acted on instruc-
tions P What would you say if a House of Com-
mons listened in silence and contentment to that
Minister*s declaration, that all he then intended to
do, was to send out a repetition of those very in-
structions* ? This, however, is the fact. The lan-
guage of Mr. Fox, which we are going to peruse, is,
therefore, that of Lord Palmerston, adopted by him
after it had been used at Washington, and avowed
to have been according to instructions after it had
failed.

We have seen already that these difficulties arose
first because the British Government had not called
that of America to account for aggressions proceed-
ing from its frontier ; and, secondly, from leaving
without reply the demand of the American Govern-
ment for redress. The question then merely is,
has this been done by negligence, or by design?

* The same delay that invites the American Government
to aggression, justifies the Foreign Secretary to his nation in
subsequent measures against the American Government. The
Foreign Secretary will be justified in his subsequent violence —
by his first moderation.

84 Correspondence between the British Envoy

In the words of Lord Palmerston, pronounced through
the mouth of Mr. Fox, which we have now got to
examine, we have additional means of ascertaining to
which of the two this position is to be attributed-—
If to negligence, then is our case desperate; for
no life or energy can remain in the constitution,
if negligence could proceed to such an extent as
this. If to design, then again is our state des-
perate, unless the faculties remain by which this
nation may detect that design in time to prevent its
accomplishment. Such a design can be resisted
only by those who detect it, and nations, as indi-
viduals, become equally the instruments of the in-
tention of a minister, when that intention is cri-
minal, and when it is not understood ; for being
criminal, they must explain his motives by that
which is not criminal, and, therefore, not true, and
account for their support by concurring with him
for reasons which are not his. The criminality of a
minister involves, therefore, total perversion of every
fact, and of every reason ; and therefore the importance
of the inquiry in which we are engaged, does not
reside in the knowledge of our present position
with America, but in this, that it affords some clue
to understand the Foreign Minister of England.
That which is alarming here is not the facts that
have occurred, but the intention from which they
spring, which, disregarded, all care is useless ;
which, left in doubt, all labour is noxious, all sub-
jects insignificant; and which, unknown, nothing
can be comprehended. This misfortune, and even
war with America would be a fortunate incident.

and the American Secretary of Slate, 35

if it were to awaken us to the knowledge of treason
at home.

Mr. Fox's first allegation is, that Mr. M'^Leod was
arrested on " a. pretended charge of arson and murder."

The charge was no pretence. It might be a ques-
tion whether Mr. MXeod was or was not a party to
the transaction, but the charge of the American Go-
vernment was noways doubtful. The criminality of
individuals could be here established by internal and
municipal law only after international admission of
the character of the transaction. Mr. M'^Leod could
be abandoned by the general Government of the
United States to a court of the State of New York
only on the British Government's not adopting the
responsibility of the act with which he was charged.
The United States Government had before asserted
the act of the destruction of the Caroline to be a
crime by the demand for redress, and its assertion
had been submitted to by England by withholding
a reply; consequently the American Government
had no other course left, on the arrest of Mr.
M*=Leod, than that of leaving him to be dealt with
by one of its tribunals : and in doing so it had to
expect and to require from England, submission to
its judgment. The charge on the part of the United
States was most positive. That charge on the part
of Great Britain had been sanctioned by silence,
by time, prescription, and endurance.

The selection, therefore, by the British Envoy, of
the term " pretended,^ was an assumption of an
insulting tone, while it was a justification of the
United States, and an encouragement to its pro-
ceedings.

tRiIiiI

36 Correspondence between the British Envoy

He continues : — '* It is welUhnown that the de-
" struction of the steam-boat Caroline was a public
*' act of persons m Her Majesty's service."

The question was, and had been for the last three
years, whether or not England took the responsi-
bility on herself of this " public act of persons in
" Her Majesty's service ?"

Lord Palmerston ( for Mr. Fox's words are
his words ) here appears to declare to the United
States Government that it is against the Govern-
ment of Great Britain that proceedings are to be
taken, and not against individuals. He subsequently
declares, in the House of Commons, that the Ameri-
can Government had the right of proceeding either
against individuals or against the Government. In
Amer'ca, he keeps the question open — he transmits
a protest to be used only after the act has taken
place, his words are then too weak to intimidate,
and can serve only to encourage. He makes
his declaration in the House of Commons in
time to prevent the American Government from
being, at the critical moment, restrained by any
consideration for the views or measures of the
British Government. While these am.biguous and
adjusted steps which have led the American Govern-
ment into this dilemma, will be afterwards ap-
pealed to as justifying the subsequent violence of
England.

Mr. Fox proceeds : — " This act cannot justly be
" made the ground of legal proceedings in the
United States against the individuals concerned,
who were bound to obey the authorities ap-
pointed by their own government."

and the American Secretary of State. 37

Of course not if these individuals acted under the
responsibility (recognised) by their own Govern-
ment; this was what Lord Palmerston refrained
from saying, in reference to which he withheld all
decision; and, therefore, the individuals in question
were amenable to the American tribunals.

Mr. Fox continues : — ** The pretended charge
rests upon the perjured testimony of certain
Canadian outlaws and their abettors, who, unfor-
** tunately for the peace of that neighbourhood,
** are still permitted by the authorities of the
** State of New York to infest the Canadian fron-
« tier."

If such were the acts of the State of New York,
how is it that they are not made the subject of official
remonstrance ? How is it that every complaint of
Britain is reserved, so that by reserve offence is pro-
cured, and then the first sin is brought forth as a
countercharge and as an insult. Could it be accident-
ally that the aggressive party invariably is invited by
submission, and that the aggrieved party invariably
brings forward prior injuries in lieu of a demand for
satisfaction ? Can it be by accident that invariably
an appearance of advocating national interests cloaks
their sacrifice, and that concession follows insult as
its shadow ? Throughout the whole of the Boundary
Transactions — of the Frontier events connected with
them — throughout every passage of that momentous
discussion of Great Britain with Russia in regard to
Persia, these same characters have been exposed, and
established on official evidence. In every other case
will the same equally be found. Every where, matter
of B'act is reduced to vague Discussion, and Dis-

38 Correspondence between the B^jtish Envoy

€(

cussion reduced to a simulated interchange of Insult
and of Wrong.

Mr. Fox continues — " That act was the public act
" of persons obeying the constituted i 'thorities of
** Her Majesty's province. The national government
" of the United States thought themselves called
" upon to remonstrate against it; and a remonstrance
" which the President did accordingly address to
Her Majesty's Go\ernment is still, / believe, a
pending subject of diplomatic di ^.assion between
Her Majesty's Government auvl the United States
" Legation in London."

Mr. Fox acts on instruciions, he writes by instruc-
tions ; how is it that Mr. Fox does not know the
diplomatic position of the two governments ?
He concludes thus:—" As the case is naturally
oc jasioning a great degree of excitement and in-
dignation within the British frontierj I earnestly
hope that it may be in your power to give me an
early and satisfactory answer to the present repre-
" sentationJ'*

CouIJ it be supposed, that the Envoy who
penned this passage, had received instructions?
Could he have any idea of an intention in the
British Government in this matter, — of rights of
England therein injured, or of obligations on Eng*
land to vindicate its own honour, or to protect her
subjects or her servants ?

But whence arises the necessity for the British
Envoy making any representation? Does is not
arise from from Lord Palmerston withholding all
reply to the demand of the United States ? But
what conclusion must we arrive at if we Knd that

((

and the American Secretary of State, 39

while withholding that answer he instructs co make
this representation J whensoever the contingency-
might arise, which his reply could alone have
prevented? He foresees the danger, takes no
means to ward it off, and does take measures to
give it a permanent character.

And what is the value of this document? Or,
to use his own word, of this " representation ?"
It is to demand the liberation of Mr. M^'Leod ; or,
rather, it is a request, that the American Govern-
ment may " take steps to obtain his liberation."
If the American Government was not guilty of
a crime in seizing that gentleman, his liberp.tion
could not be called for as a matter of right ; and if
it was a crime to seize Mr. M<'Leod, then — to cfe-
mand his liberation without demanding reparation for
his seizure, was tantamount to justifying the seizure,
and was a bar to any right of England to obtain his
liberation.

This step is taken on instructions. How, then,
is all allusion to any authority from home so care-
fully avoided ? How, in acting according to instruc-
tions, shoiUd he avoid saying so, unless he had
been instructed to conceal the fact? And what
could tlie object be of such concealment, unless to
deaden the effect of such remonstrance as he was
commissioned to make ?

The reply of Mr. Forsyth is wluit the circum-
stances give us to anticipate, and what the repre-
sentations of Mr. Fox lead us to expect. He at
once declares the case of Mr. M^'Leod to be clearly
within the competency of the local tribunals, and

-iO Correspondence bettveen the British Envoy

the transaction out of which it arose, to have been
*' AN iN^'ASioN, in time of peace, of the territory of
" the United States." How could such a position be
brought about between two governments? How
could the existence of such crimes be tolerated ?
How could the communication of such charges be
suppressed ? How could negociations exist between
two governments that thought or acted thus in
respect the one to the other ? How could such
statements be interchanged after three years of
negociatiop ?

The United States had before demanded redress
for the violation of the neutrality of its territory — it
now charges Great Britain with an invasion !
How could the first demand, how the transmutation,
be made or tolerated ? The British Minister, by
abstaining from demanding reparation for the inva-
sion of *,he British territory, had invited a charge of
crime, by opening the occasion for a demand for
redress. By the omission to establish the inter-
national character of that transaction the Govern-
ment of the United States was compelled, in
the exercise of right, to leave the result to a
court of law, as a question between individuals.
Tiien from the mode left powerless .a resist
the public impulse of its people, which could
have been repressed only by the establishment of
the rights of the case, and by the decided attitude
of Britain. The demand for redress comes — the
British Minister withholds a reply — the United
States Government is again compelled to advance,
because placed in the alternative of withdrawing

and the American Secretary of Stale. 41

from the demand which it had made, or of proceeding
to such acts as should compel England to declare
herself, and it was impossible to withdraw while
England gave no reply. The American Government,
invited a second time, takes now two steps, — it de-
signates the act as an invasion ; it proceeds against
one of the parties as a felon !

The American Government, starting from the
most outrageous wrong inflicted on Great Britain
in the events of December 1837, arrives at that
point where it has mixed up in a common charge
against Great Britain felony and war. In advancing
from the first to the last position, it has not pro-
ceeded against resistance on the part of the British
*7o V ament. It has proceeded, not only unresisted
but invited ; it has proceeded, not only invited, but
compelled to advance.

Had thii? position proceeded from an intention on
the part of the United States Government, it would
have commenced with declaring that its citizens
were not to be treated as felons by the tribunals of
Upper Canada. It would have at once, and not
after the delay of months, charged against England
violation o" Us neutrality, and it would have at
once mav. •) ? charge of " invasion." It was
England, by icceding, who drew on the United
States; it was not the United States that, by
pressing forward, constrained England to recede.
In this transaction, therefore, the United States has
perforinetl merely the part of an instrument in the
hands y' the British Government, that is, of the

42 Correspondence between the British Envoy

((

British Minister. If such had not been the inten-
tion of the British Minister, could it have been in
the power of the American Minister to continue
in the following terms : —

" If the destruction of the Caroline was a public
act of persons in Her Majesty's service, obeying
the order of their superior authorities, this fact has
not been before communicated to the Government
of the United States by a person authorised to
" make the admission."

Well may he say admission. He comprehends
the amount of the sacrifice of the position of
England ; but not ttia . ' . t sacrifice was the
success, and that weakness vhe triumph of her
minister. He goes on to state that it is imma-
terial, whether or not the British Government ad-
mits its responsibility (now its criminality) in that
transaction; that the Court of New York would
decide whether the criminality of the British Go-
vernment might screen Mr. M*=Leod ; whether the
objections of Mr. Fox, and the plea, put in by
him in extenuation, should or should not be allowed.
The following are the remarkable words which he
uses : —

" It will be for the court which has taken cogni-
" zance of the offence with which Mr. M'^Leod is
charged, to decide upon its validity (the admission
of the British Government's responsibility) when
legally established before it."
Before dismissing this passage, I must remark that
this statement is made after accepting the words of

((

and the American Secretary of State, ^^3

Mr. Fox as an admission^ by " a person qualified to
** make it" of the responsibility of the British
Government for the destruction of the Caroline.
As the British Government itself had not vindicated
its own &,cts or character— as it had allowed pro-
ceedings, during nearly three years, to be formally
taken in a court of law — as it had allowed its acts, by
the highest authorities of the state of New York, to
be publicly denounced as felony — it could not now
bring forward its own responsibility except for the
purpose of submitting more completely the crown
of England, in the person of Mr. M'^Leod, to trial
before that court.

Mr. Forsyth's dispatch concludes with these
words : —

" The President deems this to be a proper occa-
" sion to remind the Government of Her Britannic
Majesty that the case of the Caroline has been
long since brought to the attention of Her Ma-
jesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign
" Affairs, who, up to this day, has not communi-
cated his decision thereupon. It is hoped that
the Government of Her Majesty will perceive the
importance of no longer leaving the Government
" of the United States uninformed of its views and
intentions upon a subject which has naturally
produced much exasperation, and which has led
to such grave consequences."
Mr. Fox is now startled at finding that bis words
are construed into an admission of the adoption by
the Government of the destruction of the Caroline.

III

44 Correspondence between the British Envoy

He consults his instructions, and the value of some
ambiguous terms having now come out, he finds
that he has committed himself by his incidental
reference to a " well-known" fact.

He answers by a long and confused dispatch,
repeating reasons why the destruction of the Caro-
line should he considered just and proper, declares
that such were the opinions of " Her Majesty's
authorities on the spot ;*' then attempting to draw a
distinction, or assuming, rather, to have a distinction
drawn, between the act (the destruction of the steam-
boat Caroline) and the question pending between
the two Governments respecting the act — he says,
I am not authorised to pronounce the decision
of Her Majesty's Government upon that remon-
strance, but I have felt myself bound to record,
in the meantime, the above opinion, in order
to protest, in the most solemn manner, against
the spirited and loyal conduct of a party of
Her Majesty's officers and people being qualified,
through an unfortunate misapprehension, as I
believe, of the facts, with the appellation of out-
rage or of murder."
He records a protest against the appellation (!) of
outrage and murder being used to qualify the con-
duct of a party of Her Majesty's officers—o/lfer Mr.
Forsyth has accepted his former letter as an ad-
mission that the act itself was that of the British
Government. Is not this the disavowal of the Go-
vernment's share in that act ? He retracts, therefore
the admission that he has made, at least he does all

((

and the American Secretary of State. 45

he can in the way of retractation. The trouble of
his mind is shown in the incoherence of his lan-
guage no less than in the arrangement of the
thoughts and in the multiplicity of words. What
had " pronounce" to do with the subject ? It was
inconsistent with the character of the actors, and
wholly inapplicable to the situation ? it is one of
those words employed by men who deceive others
or who deceive themselves, and who do so solely by
ability in the selection of confused terms to conceal
from themselves the confusion of their minds, or
from others the dishonesty of their purpose. This
retractation could not heve been made knowing that
what he asserted was true, unless because his in-
structions prohibited his making such an admission ;
nor in retracting, would he, as he has done, have
reiterated the statement, unless his instructions had
been adjusted to produce confusion.

Thus, then, the American Government, three years
after the occurrence, had no admission by the Bri-
tish Government that the destruction of the Caroline
was its act, and it was now placed at once in posses-
sion of this admission and of its retractation. The
option was given to it of using the one or the other,
and by such apparent pusillanimity of opposition,
was encouragement afforded to advance. That this
was the intention of the Foreign Secretary in the in-
structions that he sent to Mr. Fox, is further proved
by the sanction given in the House of Commons to
his acts, and by the avowal that he had acted by in-
structions when that was unknown, and when, after

46 Correspomhnce between the British Envoy

failure, there seemed every motive for the conceal-
ment of that fact.

We have here a very remarkable case, one on
which Lord Palmerston, anticipating a contingency,
instructs beforehand. The controversy arises out of
the refusal of a reply to a demand of the United
States Government. Lord Palmerston prepares the
Envoy at Washington for this event, by instructions
which do not notice the demand.

These instructions are — to protest against the pro-
ceedings after waiting until they have taken place—to
demand the liberation of the man seized, on grounds
that justify his capture. The instructions sent could
have had effect, as being known to be instructions
from the British Government ; he is instructed to
conceal the fact that he acted on instructions. Con-
sequently, these instructions sent out to meet the
anticipated case were, in every point, calculated
to frustrate the effect of their ostensible inten-
tion. Put forward as the uniiistructed words of the
Envoy, and coinciding with tlie absolute silence and
indifference of the Government itself they could only
produce exasperation or contempt. But when it
should afterwards be known, as Lord Palmerston
took care to reveal, that these were words uttered
upon instruction*, what must be the effect? What

" * New York, Janiuxry \^tk.

*' In a debate which incidentally occurred in the senate of the

United States, on the 8th instant, Mr. Clay expressed the opinion

that ' the idea of the probability of a rupture with Great Britain

was entirely uufouuded.' He said ihat th« language used by Mr.

and the American Secretary of State, 47

then the object of this avowal ? Can there here
remain a shadow of a doubt that the British Minister
acted to bring about that which has occurred ?

We must now examine if in every point this
supposition is borne out. We must examine, whe-
ther by sending no instructions, other injuries might
not have accrued — whether to remedy the evil,
other instructions ought to have been sent ; that is
to say, whether the instructions can be explained as
directed to prevent some evil which has not hap-
pened ; whether the instructions were not exactly
calculated to effect that which has occurred.
Let us suppose then Mr. M<^Leod arrested, and the
Envoy uninstructed. What must have happened?
The event would come upon him without prepara-
tion ; his indignation would have been aroused — he
would have expressed himself strongly — ^he would
have treated with scorn and contempt the idea of
the jurisdiction of a separate state — ^he would have
entered into no detail, committed himself to no

Fox in his correspondence was very strong, and such as he
thought ought not to have been employed without instruction
from his government ; but he understood that the whole corres-
pondence, on the part of the minister, was without instructions,
and he was not disposed to put himself in a possicm on account of
language used under such circumstances. The affair of the Ca-
roline he considered as one of much delicacy ; and it remained to
be seen whether the order of the British authorities to capture
the vessel was not intended to be limUed to the waters over which
they had jurisdiction^ which might have been justifiable ; but her
capture and destruction at Fort Schlosser, on our own shore, was
another and a very different matter."

48 Corresp(mdence between the British Enroif

statements of any kind ; and the reference to the
decision from home would have kept the Govern-
ment and the puhlic of the United States to a cer-
tain degree in suspense. With no instructions, the
British Envoy must have done more and written
less ; instructed, he has both failed in that which
he attempted, and committed himself in regard to
that with which he had nothing to do. But he has
not failed in that which was required from him ;
he has, through misconception of his orders, done
that which the Minister wished him to do, since he
has been justified, and his acts confirmed, and
the Minister has publicly avowed that all he did
was done by instruction.

Now let us see what ought to have been the na-
ture of instructions which could, in this case, be of
use ; though this is an impossible case, as, while the
American demand remained unreplied to, no instruc-
tions could alter the position of England. But let
us suppose, that the British Minister had anticipated
the seizure of a British officer, on the grounds of
participation in the destruction of the Caroline,
without there having been made any demand of
redress from the American Government. What, in
such case, could the instructions be? Must they
not have been to declare that the destruction of the
Caroline was an act of the Government, and that
any proceedings against an individual, not only
would be resented by the British Government as
such, but that it was an outrage for which the British
Government instantly demanded redress. This not

avd the American Secretary of State. 40

said, nothing was Scaid. Wherefore, then, this not
being said, send instructions ? Why anticipate the
case, if not to do that which it required ? The
English Government avows that it anticipates the
seizure of one of its subjects after the American Go-
vernment has demanded satisfaction and it sends out

—what? Instructions to its own Envoy, and takes no
step with the United States Government ! This was
not negligence, because instructions were sent ; and if
it was not by negligence, it was by intention, that
the American Government was left without reply.
The instructions to the Envoy were, therefore, sent
with the same view that the reply to the American
Government was not given, and the intention is
further confirmed by the result obtained, and which
both concurred to bring about.

Again, had those instructions been with any in-
tention of meeting the difficulty, the Envoy would
have been armed so as to meet the arguments, or
the assumptions of the United States Government.
'That Government, it was known full well, would
plead the separate jurisdiction of the state of New
York. Had not then the Envoy to be instructed to
declare, in the name of Great Britain, that to talk
of the separate jurisdiction of a Court of New York
was an insult which England could not notice ?

Here is a long chain of evidence, commencing
with the absence of any demand upon the United
States, in consequence of the transactions that led to
the destruction of the Caroline — then a demand of
satisfaction from America left unreplied to — then

50 Correspondence between the British Envoy

instructions sent out which should corroborate the
aggressions of the United States, while calculated to
satisfy people in England that something had been
(lone — instructions to protest against the act so
arranged, that the protest should not appear to be
made by the British Government — then the libera-
tion of the individual is demanded on grounds that
justify his seizure; and after all these, comes the
leaving of the British Minister unsupplied with the
means of meeting that case, which it was evident
the American Government would put forth. There
is not a single link which is not conclusive either as
to idiotcy or as to guilt. But it is impossible to
admit the first as the solution of two or more acts
which coincide in intention. But I will take the
last ; and as it may appear, perhaps, the most insig-
nificant of these acts, the witliholding of the neces-
sary declaration against the separate jurisdiction of
the State of New York*, and I will prove in it alone
the guilty intention of the whole transaction.

If the British Foreign Secretary had upon another
occasion, the violation, for instance, of British terri-
tory by American citizens, admitted difficulties of
constitutional action of the American State, as the
justification of the American Government for leaving
such acts unpunished ; if the British Foreign Secre-
tary had himself suggested that excuse to the Ame-
rican Government for not punishing this outrage —

* This declaration will be made after it can be no longer of use
to prevent the evil, but when it will be of use to aggravate it.

and the American Secretary of Stale, 51

if he had suggested that excuse before the American
Government had refused to punish it, — if he had put
it forward as the groL'nd for not requiring on the part
of the British Government such punishment, — would
you not then see clearly that the suggestion of this
excuse, to encourage direct aggression, and the
leaving the British Envoy without the means of
meeting the same excuse, when put forward to jus-
tify the present act, were co-ordinate parts of the
same design ? Such design, is it not criminal ?
What I have stated is no supposition, it is fact. On
the 19th November, 1837, he wrote as follows to
Mr. Fox : —

" With reference to your dispatch of the 25th
" of January last, relative to the outrage that was
" committed in October, 1835. within the Canadian
ontier, by certain citizens of the State of New

-^conpshire, — I have to instruct you to point out to

the American Secretary of State, the unjustifiable
** violation of territory, indisputably British, which
" was committed on the occasion referred to; to

express a conviction that such an act must incur

the disapprobation of the President ; and to say
" that, if it has not been punished, its impunity must

have arisen from some insurmountable difficulties

of constitutional action''^,'*

((

* The following remarks on this passage are in the " Exposi-
tion of the Bound *ry Diflferences," p. 64.

" It is a novel procedure in diplomacy, to suggest an excuse
for an injury, as the means by which redress is to be obtained !
To advance an hypothesis in an irrelevant matter, and to cast an

Correspondence, S^c.

imputation on the constitutional character of an independent
state, has, I believe, been hitherto unheard of in international
correspondence. So complete a displacement of the queotion at
issue — so entire a departure from the forms of the s'abject, and
the style of the oifice — so artful a leading away of the mind of
the reader from the intention of the writer, and from the eSTect
of the communication — could not have fortuitously presented
thfc.nselves to the writer's mind ; nor could ideas so disjointed,
and propositions so unnatural, have been brought together in a
single phrase, except by an ominous concert cf ability and
design.'

See also Appendix, No. VII., where it will bb found that
Lord Palmerston proposed to the United States Government that
the State of Maine should be "a consenting party" to certain
adjustments respecting the Boundary Differences.

>t
il
it
d
)f
;t
d

1,
a
d

it
n

PART III.

DEBATE IN THE H0US3 OF COMMONS.

*' What is the condition of a country, whose representatives
depend for a knowledge of its position on vague rumours, that
reach it from abroad ?" — ^Lord Palmerrton, June \%t^ 1829.

Supposing a citizen of the United States seized
by England, put in prison, brought to trial for his
liic.. because, being an officer of the United States
Government, he hvad executed an act commanded him
by authority — how many hours would elapse be-
tween the arrival of the intelligence in the United
States, and a message from the President to Congress ?
What would be the movements throughout the
wide belt intervening between the Gulphs of Mexico
and the St. La^^^rence, as the intelligence rolled
across from the Atlantic to the Pacific ? What would
be the terms of the address of the Senate, — what the
language of the dispatch of the Government,— what
the celerity of the flight of the messenger ?

Mr. M'^Leod is arrested on the twelfth of No-
vember, the British Government must; have received
intelligence of the fact in the beginning of December.
The Parliament opens January 26th . No message
is sent down from the Crown, — no declaration is
made by the Minister ! Correspondence connected

54 Debate in the House of Commons.

with the transaction is giv^n to the House of Con-
gress — it reaches this country by the public press;
and questions are thereupon put to the Minister
in the House of Commons on the 8th of Feb-
ruary. The trial, on which hung the life of the
individual, in whose person this whole nation was
to be brought to judgment, was to take place in the
beginning of March, and on the 8th of February,
the Foreign Secretary being then, for more than two
months, in possession of the fact, no instructions
had been sent, and the instructions to be sent that
night were declared to be the repetition only of
instructions which were already in America, in
face of which the act had been committed, and the
full effect of which had been already tried in vain !
What words do our language possess to give
utterance to the thoughts which such acts inspire ?
What use of comment? what need of analysis ?
Why call in documents ? Why trace collateral
proof ? That which is in evidence, alas ! is not the
intentions of the man, but it is the perfect imbecility
of the race in the midst of whom such a position
can be revealed, without one explosion of indigna-
tion from shore to shore.

It is in the following words that the British
Minister replies : —

" The subject was one of extreme interest, and
which, from the great delicacy of its nature,
involving considerations of a very grave and se-
rious character between two great countries,
" should be touched upon with great reserve."

((

Debate in the House of Commons.

This semblance of fear and of alarm, allows the
American Government to think they have made the
discovery of consciousness in Lord Palmerston, of
weakness in his case, and of powerlessness in nls
position. He then boldly proceeds to justify the
American Government.

** The American Government undoubtedly might
" have considered this transaction either as a
" transaction to be dealt with between the two

Governments, by demand for redress by one,

to be granted or refused by the other, and dealt

with accordingly; or, it might have been con-
" sidered as the British authorities consider pro-
" ceedings between American citizens on the
" British side of the border, as matter to be dealt
" with by the local authorities*."

A Minister of the Crown opens his mouth to
establish a parallel between outlaws and its meri-
torious servants, — establishes that parallel in face of
proceedings against them by a foreign government
as felons ! — and a senate listens !

Has not England possessions — has she not
subjects and citizens in America ? Is not the
principal portion of her strength beyond these
islands, rooted on the continent of America ? What

* '* When it is asserted that the case of McLeod is similar to
that of the fellows who without orders from any lesponsible
authority — ^nay, in direct violation of your laws, — made hostile
incursions into Canada, there must be a great lack of discrimina-
tion, or something worse."

New York Journal of Commerce.

Debate in the House of Commons.

in-

.. 1

will be the effect of these words to the north of
the frontiers of the United States ? What the effect
of this comparison upon the men to whom the de-
fence of the British possessions was entrusted — on
the body to which these volurteers belonged, — on
the provincial governments which they obeyed — on
the North American colonies which they defended,
and of which they constitute a part ? I shrink from
the attempt of calling up in my own mind the
feeling with which as a North American subject of
the British Crown, I should read those words as
spoken by an Englishman, uttered on the soil of
England, echoing within the precincts of St. Ste-
phen's, and listened to by those possessed of fche
respect of millions, and ruling the destinies of the
mightiest empire beneath the sun.

The Foreign Secretary proceeds : — " But the
" American Government chose the former course
" by treating the matter as one to be def»ided
" between the two Governments — "

What continuation could there be to the passage
but this? " and having adopted that course, it
is impossible for it now to proceed against indi-
viduals." No, the phrase concludes :
" — and this is the ground on which they are
ENTITLED to demand redress from the British
Government, for the acts of its srBJECTS."
Is not then this man, the nominal Minister of the
British nation — the advocate of the United States ?
But this is the man who has led the United States
into the actual hazard of its existence, he must, there-

((

«<

Debate in the House of Commons.

fore, be its enemy — he is both ! He is the foe of its
peace — and for that purpose is he the advocate of
its injustice. He is for the United States that which
he is for England — that which he is for the world.

Having, in these few sentences, given the explicit
sanction of the British Government to the act of
America ; having given, by pronouncing them, in its
presence, the sanction to these transactions of the
House of Commons, he then concludes with saying
that he was " sure the House wo\dd think with him,

that the matter was one of such extreme difficulty,

that it would be improper for him to enter into
" further remarks or observations.**

Mr. Hume then rises, and declares that the state-
ments the noble Lord has made " are not exactly
'* consistent" with the information of which he is
in possession, and entreats the House not to go
further in the matter until they pre possessed of
all the facts ; and he expresses his surprise that the
British Government had not given a reply to the
demand of America. To this Lord Palmerston
answers, by saying that the American Government
had instructed its Minister " not to press for a
" reply.'*

The British Government, in replying, must either
have given satisfaction or refused it ; and in either
case further proceedings were barred. By leaving
the demand without reply, the United States Go-
vernment becan\e possessed of the power, dangerous,
but not, theref'^ .e, less desired, of proceeding against
British citizens, of exacting redress, or even of

Debate, in the House of Commons.

making reprisals against the State. Time and pre-
scription became no bar, because, while the British
Government withheld a reply, it was not in its
power to plead either. From the moment the Ame-
rican Government obtains this position, it preserves
it ; that is to say, it does not press for that reply,
which, once given, would annihilate this power. It
suffices for Lord Palmerston to quote this proof of
the advantage he had yielded to a state which he
was engaged in the process of converting into an
enemy, to close the mouth of those who questioned.
He accounts for the injury, by saying that it is
done; and those who charge him with neglitfence,
he meets— knowing them — by daring them to dis-
cover his intention.

He further declares, that

" The American Government had disavowed the
acts of those citizens who had taken part in these
proceedings, and that, until, therefore, the British
" Government disowned those persons, as the
" American Government disavowed their citizens
in the other case, he conceived that the American
Government had adopted an international respon-
sibility in the late detention of Mr. M^'Leod, and
could not, therefore, change their ground upon
this question."
He had taken the ground at Washington, that the
American Government had not the right to proceed
against the individuals. He then declares in the
House of Commons that it has the right to proceed
in the one or the other manner ; but he has practically

€(

Debate in the fff'use of Commons.

sanctioned both ; he has not treated the seizure of
Mr. M«Leod as an outrage upon England* ; and he
has admitted, by silence, the demand of redress
against the Government. Mr. Forsyth has, more-
over, put forward the explicit declaration, that the
American Government has a right to proceed by
both methods. That declaration officially made, and
published to the world, is met by Lord Palmerston
with the declaration that unquestionably the Ame-
rican Government had the right of proceeding in
either one or the other manner. If the American
Government had the right of proceeding at all, it
had the faculty of choice. Lord Palmerston further
declares that the instructions which he had now
sent to Mr. Fox were the same as those which
had already drawn from Mr. Forsyth this very
declaration, to which, under those instructions, Mr.
Fox had had nothing to reply.

Thus has Lord Palmerston managed at once to
sanction (for the moment) the proceedings against
Mr. M«Leod in America, and to leave grounds for
after-proceedings against the American Government
for that act. This is the object of this ambiguity ;
his ambiguous words being interpreted in different
ways by the American Government and by the
British Parliament.

But both these proceedings are against the Eng-
lish Government since the act was the English
Government's: there was an alternative as to the

* Not until the United States Govemment was committed.

Dehalo in the Home of Commons.

modes of proceeding — nor was this an alternative
— there were two modes of procedure ; but there
was only one party proceeded against. Lord Pal-
merston confounds his hearers by simulated alter-
natives in a dilemma which had no existence.
His hearers, confounded in this maze, and unable
to see, labour to find a justification for his acts
so as to justify thei*' own blindness ; hence the
expression recently current amongst Members
of Parliament, " Lord Palmerston has hung the
" American Government between the horns of a
" dilemma."

But let us look at the separate terms emi)loyed
in this wonderful sentence.

It is not the seizure of Mr. M<=Leod, but his
" detention r it is not his " detention" alone, but

/a^e," as if the time were gone by. " Until those

persons were disavowed," as if there was a ques-
tion respecting their disavowal ; then he doubtingly
" conceives'^ that the United States had " adopted'''
a " responsibility," and then the responsibility is
" international." There is international justice and
injustice ; but international responsibility cannot
be, because responsibility has reference to superiors.
Let us set down the words which the hearer was to
suppose he heard — ** The American Government has
" been guilty of international injustice ; it cannot,
" therefore, justly change its ground." Is comment
requisite here ? — or do you think that accident has
arranged these terms — an(i that there is no intention
in any thing which is above your comprehension ?

Debate in the House of Commons.

The American Government had changed no
ground — had never spoken or thought of any such
thing. The American Government had originally
taken criminal steps against the agents of the
British Crown ; that was its first, as that had been
its last step ; the first which it threatened, and tlie
last which it executed, which England had not
resisted, but which she had encouraged. But no
sooner have the words, " The American Govern-
" ment cannot^ I conceive, change their ground,"
fallen from the lips of the Foreign Secretary, than
the House of Commons calls out " hear, hear !"
These sounds were not to be lost upon the American
Government* — and at this point the defence of the
Foreign Secretary was cu*. short by the leader of
the opposition, who arose to his rescue, by putting
an irrelevant question upon another subject.

On the following day, the debate is resumed in
the House of Commons, and the Foreign Secretary
then puts it in possession of further information ; he
tells it that " a case of a somewhat similar nature
** had happened, or was about to happen, a year
" or a year and a half ago," on which occasion he
had sent out instructions to the Envoy at Washing-
ton, '* laying down what he conceived to be sound
" principles in such an emergency ! "

Has not Britain reason to rejoice in the activity
oi her servants, in the foresight of her Government ?

* See Portfolio, Vol. I., Despatch of Prince Lieven to Count
Nesselrode, 1st June, 1829, where another " hear, hear," of the
House of Commons, is quoted in triumph and exultation.

Debate in the House of Commons.

If dis&sters befall her, or disgrace overwhelm her, it is
surely not because she has been deficient in activity,
in charities, and in doctrine ; and if she has reason
to complain of aught, it is that human nature is
perverse, and that fortune is her debtor.

During the first day's debate, Lord Palraerston
avoids to recognise the destruction of the Caroline
as an act of the British Government. By the mere
fact of keeping them in suspense during four-and-
twenty hours, he converts a public act, simple and
notorious, which had happened three years before,
into the leading object of interest and of attention,
at this critical moment ; every other portion of the
transaction is thus obscured before their eyes, and
no one thinks of inquiring why he had not replied
to the demand of the American Government, >vhy,
in anticipating this case, he had not sent such
instructions as were fitting, &c. He holds up to
them the doubt of the recognition of the destruc-
tion of the Caroline; and at this target are aimed
the shafts of his nerveless adversaries. On the
second day he avows that act, quells opposition,
and gathers in his antagonists' weapons. On the
avowal of the destruction of the Caroline, a cheer
immediately ascends from both sides of the House,
the one party glorying in the decision of its
leader, the other exulting in the energy which it
has displayed in compelling from him this admission^
All are ready again to treat with ridicule and con-
tempt any one who ventur^^s to doubt, or who
dares to gainsay ; and another sound issuing from

Di'Oi'te in the House of Commons.

that brainless organ of an infatuated people, is
blown across the Atlantic, to confirm the belief of
that insanity in the British State, which always
precedes, because it alone can bring — a nation's
fall.

But this is not the sole reason for which he has
withheld, on the first day of the debate, the recog-
nition by the Government of the destruction of the
Caroline. These two debates, though following
for England at the interval of a few hours, will
follow for America at the end of two weeks*.
Look then at the eflfect of leaving the United
States in that suspense for a fortnight in which
the House of Commons had been left for a day.

The debate on this second day closes with a
declaration by Lord Palmerston, that the recog-
nition of the destruction of the Caroline had been
officially made through the British Envoy at
Washington to the United States Government, and
to the United States Minister in London. Without
any knowledge upon the subject, I should judge
these assertions to be false, because it would not
occur to Lord Palmerston, in speaking to the Bri-
tish Nation, to say that which is true. But we
know the falsehood of both statements, from the
documents given to the American Congress. But the

* Th'i two debates did reach America together. This does not
alter the fact, that on the night of the 9th it was not anticipated,
that the morning papers of the 10th would be in time for the
steamer.

■m

Debate in the House of Commons.

House of Commons was perfectly satisfied with the
declaration, and there the matter ended, without a
motion for impeachment — for inquiry, without a vote
of censure, without an address to the crown, without
a demand for papers, without a suggestion, and the
subject was dismissed because there was no question
before the House !

It comes before the House of Commons in these
two nights* discussion : —

That no reply had been given by Lord Pal-
merston during three years to a demand of the
United States, which allowed the charge of arson
and murder to hang over the Crown of Great
Britain — and there was Jiot a Member of the
House found to see the meaning of such silence, or
to utter one word of reproach or of indignation :— .
That the case of the seizure by the United
States of a servant of the British Crown, as justi-
ciable under that charge, had been anticipated,
and that Instructions were sent out specially to
plead before the United States. There was not a
J^Tember found in the House to understand the
meaning of that Instruction, or to express one word
of reproach or of indignation : —

That the Government had sanctioned the act of the
destruction of the Caroline, and had not made use ol
that sanction for the only purpose for which it was
required, the declaration of it to the United States;
and further, a false statement that it had been so
communicated, and there was not a man in the
House to understand the meaning of that suppres-

Debate in the House of Commons.

sion or that falsehood — not one found to utter one
word of reproach or of indignation : —

That hours, days, weeks, and months, must have
elapsed from the receipt of the intelligence of the
seizure of that subject of the British Crown, without
a communication made to Parliament, and without
a step taken with respect to the United States ; and
there was not a man in that House to understand
the meaning of that delay, or to utter one word of
reproach or of indignation : —

That the Minister placed servants of the Crown
who had exposed their life in performance of
duty, on the same level with the bandits and the
outlaws, against whom they had been employed,
and exposed by this declaration these servants to be
tried as felons by a foreign judicatory ; and there
was not found in that House a single head to
comprehciid the object of that declaration, or a
tongue to utter one word of reproach or of indig-
nation !

Before that Senate came the most atrocious out-
rage ever recorded in the page of history — committed
by a foreign state against a British subject ; judi-
cially asserted by a foreign court against a func-
tionary of the British Empire ; diplomatically
asserted by the United States against Great Britain.
Before it came evidence that this had been brought
about by its own Minister, through a process.
Before it comes proof of reiterated falsehood of that
Minister in the process itself, and in the explanation
respecting that process given to the House. In its

■ C 1

n I

Debate in the House of Commons,

verv presence ire directed to the United States words
of sanction and encouragement — and these men,
lying shadows of life, knowing not what they
did, and accounting not what they were, sit
{.round unmoved; they lister with ears of flesh
but with hearts of stone — nay ! they exult and
rejoice, making a noise wi^b their tongues — a
noise to fill the fiends with laughter, and to make
angels weep. Must not that state perish, whose
fate is yielded into such hands ? or, rather, is not
that state unworthy to live where such are to be
found ? Yet at that moment one awful word pro-
nounced, the cry of alarm raised by a single voice,
and the traitorous spell might have been broken,
and this people's trnnce dissolved.

But England is divided into two parties ; if the
one party supports, the other party opposes the
Government. How is it, then, that we have here
the opponents of the Government not coming for-
ward as a body to denounce this act ? If it is a
party, if it is an opposition, was this not the time
to appear as such? Was not this the moment
when resistance was not faction — when union was a
crime ?

Far from that, it is the leader of the opposition
who interposes to save the Minister from his own
supporters. Not interposes by argument or by state-
ment, but by bald interruption. Sir Robert Peel
interrupts the discussion; first, by questions re-
specting the reward of officers wounded in that

Debate in the House of Commons.

assault, which leads to a reply from Lord John
Russell that he knows nothing on the subject. Sir
R. Peel again interposes with questions regarding
the affairs of Persia. Mr. O'Connell, amidst the
cheers of both sides of the House, calls it back to
the question before it ; and then again does Sir R.
Peel, with the assistance of the Speaker, carry the
House back again to the affairs of Persia. He
interrupts the discussion upon a subject, pressing
and instant, to introduce one distant, remote, long
known, and equally long neglected. Were the
affairs of Persia those in which Sir Robert Peel had
habitually shown interest, upon which he had ex-
pressed conviction, or regarding which he had
taken care ? The interruption can, therefore, be
accounted for neither by indifference to the subject
interrupted, nor by the importance of that introduced.
If not, was this sudden interruption prompted
by a consciousness of the necessity of attending
to our diffi ilties in the East, by this evidence
of the insecurity of our interests in the West ?
The thorough examination of that which was be-
fore them, alone could afford the means for the
restoration, or the comprehension > of either. If
we can find nothing in the transaction, which can
account for the interruption, we must look for the
cause elsewhere ; we must suppose either that he
acted through the consciousness of a common
responsibility with the Minister, or through con-
sciousness of so much danger in the state, as
to make it a matter of expediency to prevent

Debate in the House of Commons.

the eyes of the nation from being opened to
its danger ? If so, that condition in which Athens
stood, when the commonwealth was betrayed,
" neither willingly, nor ignorantly, but from a
" desperate purpose of yielding to the fate of a
" constitution judged to be irrevocably lost" — has
come for England ? A condition in which the
defenders of the state, some from intention, and
some from misjudging, become alike its enemies
and its destroyers.

The debate closed by an assertion of Lord Palmer-
ston, that the recognition, by the British Government,
of the destruction of the Caroline, had been officially
announced to the representative of the United States
in this country. This statement is false j but if it is
false, how is it that that gentleman does not expose
it ? It is currently reported, that Mr. Stevenson had
declared that he would expose this falsehood*. But
could any man, in the slightest degree conversant
with diplomatic transactions, — in the slightest degree
understanding the position to which America has
been brought, — in any degree understanding the man
who is the Minister of England, suppose that such
an exposure was possible ?

A diplomatic servant cannot act upon his own

* On the arrival of the first intelligence of the destruction of
the Caroline, Lord Palmerston casually remarked to Mr. Steven-
son, that he supposed the English Government would adopt the
act ; when the matter came officially before him, he refused all
explanation. Such is understood to be the result of the explana-
tions between the American Envoy and the British Secretary.

Debate in the House of Commons.

impulse; and to have exposed Lord Palmerston,
Mr. Stevenson would have required instructions
from his own Government. Could the American
Government act in such a case? Men, as govern-
ments, that are led, can venture to do nothing.
He who prepares events, ventures, and acts —
not he who is taken aback by events, and is unpre-
pared for results which another has designed and
executed. Besides, the American Government, is it
not now brought into a position of hostility to Great
Britain ? Unable to conceive the design of restoring
harmony by conquering that hostility in its source,
it remains for it only to become the enemy of England,
and to look on any thing that will injure England as
a benefit to itself. It sees, then, that this British
Minister has by pusillanimity, as it will suppose,
in one case, and by falsehood in another, given to
itself a position of strength as against Great Britain,
not seeing that he is the cause of the danger to both.
It will consider that the same imbecility and false-
hood must rouse up foes to England throughout the
world. Before minds thus doubting and thus inimi-
cal, the long Disputed Territory will arise ; and in
more distant perspective, those magnificent posses-
sions of England in North America, containing,
within themselves, elements of manufacturing and
maritime greatness, inferior to those only which
have given empire to these Isles:- — which once
possessed, the United States is lelieved from all
control on the continent of America, and a trans-
fer is effected, from the Old World to the New,

70 Debate in the House of Commotes.

of greatness, power, and dominion. All these
under-currents of thought are carrying the Ame-
rican Government day by day into a position more
and more favourable to the Minister of this coun-
try, whether as to awakening ambitious thoughts,
whether as to confirming hostile acts, whether as to
the inspiring of sentiments inimical to Great Britain,
and as rendering difficult, if not impossible, to
retract from the steps into which they have been
led. Therein is triumph, for the designs of which
he is the instrument, and security to himself. In
other crimes, danger is increased by its perpetra-
tion ; but in treason, it is the very accomplishment
that gives security. He is secure from exposure by
any state that he makes the foe of Britain ; he is
secure from all inquiry in his own country, when
the hatred with which he has inspired any Foreign
State will have roused up counter hostility and
passion in his own: Lord Palmerston can be ex-
posed by none, except by the friend of England,
and having wielded the power of England during
eleven years, he has left no chance throughout the
wide world of such exposure.

And that which is the chief danger is this, that
state after state, by England's act, is linked together
in mutual sympathies ; they join in a tacit recogni-
tion that the day of reckoning for England with all
is at hand — thence the growth of reciprocal confi-
dence — hence the habit of common concealment
from England, alike of their thoughts and of their
intentions. But what needs the tracing of con«e-

Debate in the House of Commons. 71

quences— if it be that the Minister of England is
the instrument of Russia ? Can there be any diffi-
culty, if this is so, in confusing every state in the
world, and in making every state England's foe ?
That collusion is the sole question to be examined ;
that collusion is to be established, not by glancing
at events passing, but by examining such as are
concluded; proved in one instance, it is proved in
all.

PART IV.

PARALLEL CASE OF BOUNDARY DIFFERENCES.

" Such a man is a public enemy, who saps the foundations of
the peace and common safety of nations." — Vattel.

But does this transaction stand alone ? No ; the
greatest of international differences, one of disputed
Territory, pends between the United States and
England — difference such as cannot long remain
between nations*, without rousing up every latent
element of ill-will, sowing the seed of war, and
destroying the value of peace ; such differences are
dangerous alike in their origin as in their effects ;
because they can exist only by some criminal design,
or by some inability to manage public affairs. If
there is the suspicion of intentional incitement of
America in regard to the affair of Mr. M*^Leod,
we must turn to examine this long-agitated ques-
tion, respecting which voluminous documents are
in our hands. With two such transactions before
us, we surely may be able to arrive at a just
estimate of the character, and a clear percep-

* " The tranquillity of people, the safety of states, the hap-
piness of the human race, do not allow that the frontiers * * * of
nations should remain uncertain, subject to dispute, and ever
ready to occasion bloody wars." — Vattel, Law of Nations.

' 5f!::ii

Parallel Case of Boundary Differences. 73

tion of the intentions of the single individual who
acts for England.

The differences between the United States and
{jreat Britain have been adjusted by a double inter'
national transaction — the one, a solemn Convention
between England and the United States ; the other, a
sovereign Award rendered according to the terms of
that Convention. How then can there l)e here a
question open between the two countries ?

In January 1831, was that Award rendered.
The Minister of the British Crown refused that
Award to the House of Commons ; told that House,
after the Award had been rendered, and accepted
by the Crown of England, that the question was one
regarding which " negociations were pending" and
called upon it to place reliance in the declaration

which he made in his ministerial capacity, that

the motion for its production could not be safely
^' assented to*." This minister then avoided taking
any steps to obtain the recognition of the Award
by the United States, and did take steps multi-
farious and complicated, to obtain its rejection.
This transaction I have already exposed in detailf ;

««

* parliamentary Debates, March 14, 1831.

f Howe of Commons, Avgutt 26, 1839. — '^ Mr. D'Isbaeli :
I beg to present a petition. Sir, from certain merchants and ship-
owners of the city of London. It is most respectably signed ; and,
among others, by gentlemen who are now, and several who have
been, Members of this House ; by the Committee of the North
American Association ; by the President of the South American
Association ; and other firms of great respectability, stating —

74 Parallel Case of Boundary IHffereHcvs.

and as that exposition is within the reach of who-
ever desires to examine it, I shall here content
myself with asserting that during six years of
negociation, every line, every act, every statement,
every omission, coincides systematically to reach
the same end, that of abrogating the Award — re-
opening the question — inviting the American Go-
vernment to advance pretences, and the Border
population to commit aggression*. In that case, as
in the present, every word uttered by the Foreign
Secretary was false ; and the House of Commons on
that, as on this occasion, submitted alike to his
falsehoods and to his denial of information.

Just a month before the burning of the Caroline,
Lord Palmerston had completely shaken off the
Award of the King of Holland. On the 19th No-

* That the Minister for Foreign Affairs, to whose intelligence and
integrity are entrusted the honour and interests of this country, ■
has been publicly charged with criminality of the gravest charac-
ter, in an " Exposition op the Boundary Difpebences
BETWEEN Great Britain and the United States. By David
Urqdhart, Esq." The petitioners, therefore, pray this Ho-
nourable House to institute an inquiry into these allegations,
demanded alike by the honour of the Minister, and the interests
of the nation.' " — Mirror of Parliament.

* Sir John Harvey declares to Lord Glenelg that the vexatious
proceedings of the State of Maine, " if they did not actually arise,
received an increased degree of confidence from some (doubtless
wilful) misconception on the part of the people of Maine, of a
declaration imputed to Lord Palmerston in his place in the House
of Commons." Could the Governor of a Province, speaking of
a minister, express himself more significantly ?

Parallel Case of Boundary Differences. 75

vember, 1837, he writes thus : — '* The two govern-
ments are AS FREE, in respect to this settlement,
as they were before this reference to the King of
" the Netherlands had been made !"

" Free /" Weigh the word, and consider who
the man is who uses it.

But supposing that the Award of the King of
Holland could be set aside, you had the Convention
of 1827 to regulate the proceedings, and that Con-
vention was again but explanatory of the Treaty of
Ghent of 1814, which stipulates the appointment of
a judge and arbiter.

Having broken up the award, the minister pro-
ceeds to new negociations without any Convention
to bind the parties to abide by a new award, or to
adjust, by some common agreement, the terms of
the settlement? What would be said of such a
proceeding if no bonds or treaties were in existence ?
If the Award had not been set aside with the view
of preventing a settlement, he would have now pro-
posed a readjudication under the Convention, which
they pretended had not been adhered to with suf-
ficient strictness in the decision of the King of Hol-
land*. The Convention is never heard of again — it

* The ground assumed for setting aside the award of the
King of Holland is, that, instead of selecting one of the two
lines, the arbiter had laid down another line. The Conven-
tion of September 29, 1837, declares, in the first article,
*' That the points of diflFerence which have arisen in the settle-

76 Parallel Case of Boundary Differences,

passes away as the Award has passed. Can tliere,
then, be a doubt as to the motive ? Then the two

ment of tho Boundary between British and American dominions,
shall be referred to some friendly Sovereign or State, who shall bo
invited to investigate and make a decision upon such points of
difference."

Again, in tho Treaty of Ghent, of 1814, the words are as clear
as words can be, and die intertion as evident, that whatever
differences should arise, were to be irrevocably settled by the
decision of the arbiter. It says, in article 4, which adjusts the
mode of proceeding in regard to the Boundary specified in article
5 — " In the event of the Commissioners differing upon all or
any of the matters so referred to them * * * His Britannic
Majesty and the Government of the United States agree to refer
the Reporter Reports of the Commissioners to the Sovereign of some
friendly State, who shall be requested to decide upon the differ-
ences which shall be stated in the said Report or Reports. *
And His Britannic Majesty and the Government of the United
States engage to consider the decisioii of such friendly Sovereign
or State as final and conclusive on all the matters so referred."

The Convention of the 27th September, 1829, under which
the King of Holland was chosen for the arbiter, stipulates, in
Article 7> " That the decision of the arbiter, when given, shall
be taken as final and conclusive, and shall be carried without
reserve into immediate effect."

It is further assumed that the King of Holland had not given
a decision, but only pronounced an opinion. Why then did the
English Government address to the King of Holland its acceptance
of the award? The statement is too nonsensical to merit a
reply. The words used are " notM sommes d'avis" which is the
form of such arbitration — which is the term used in the arbitra-
tion of tho Emperor of Russia on the question of slaves referred
to him, equally under the Treaty of Ghent, and which imposed

Parallel Case of Boundary Differences. 77

Governments enter into that exchange of words,
which was characterised by Sir Robert Peel, in the
House of Commons, as ** a series of propositions
" reciprocally made and rejected," but which was a
series of propositions, so made to the United States
by the British Minister, as to invite rejection, and
invited by him from the United States, to be re-
jected*.

The Foreign Minister, in his urgency to settle this
matter, sends out the British commission without
settling any mode of decision, or even waiting for that
of America. But theAmerican commission not having
proceeded to the same task conjointly with that of
Britain, this haste could noways advance the settle-
ment, even if, under such circumstances, a settlement
was possible. The commissioners conclude their
task, they come home, they make a report; the
Foreign Secretary, who communicates no documents
while " negociations are pending," publishes the
report! The cases on both sides, had they not
to be simultaneously presented ? In the former
adjustment, the most special care had been taken

upon England a heavy pecuniary loss, without our statesmen
having then discovered that " avis" was an opinion, and not a
decision. The words of the Russian award are less formal
than those of the King of Holland. The King of Holland
says, " nous sommes cTavit" rendering the award in his own
person. The Russian Government rendering the award in the
name of the Minister, thus, " VEmpermr eat ^avU."
* See Appendix, No. VII.

78 Parallel Case of Boundary Differences,

to settle by an international act the mode of proce-
dure, so that the reports should be simultaneously
presented. But here British Commissioners are
sent out alone, and their report is published to the
world, before any steps are taken to adjust the
matter with America; before it was settled under
what authority it was to be adjusted, and without
even there being any commission appointed by Ame-
rica. What could avail all the Reports that the in-
genuity of men could furnish, unless presented to the
arbiter who had to decide ? And this report is made
public by the very minister who had refused to parlia-
ment the Award of the King of Holland ! Perhaps
it was that this Report should produce a favourable
impression upon the feelings of America — that it
could facilitate the negociation, by the concurrence
which it held out, and the favourableness of the
conclusions to America at which it had arrived.
Let us open the Report, and see what it proposes :
The Report claims the whole matter in dispute :
nay — it goes further — it claims a portion of the
territory of the United States! Supposing this a
bond fide transaction, the publication of the Report
must have enlightened the American Government
with respect to the arguments which England would
use ; and exasperated the American people with
respect to the pretensions which she advanced, and
tended necessarily to unite the whole of the American
people in a common cause with the state of Maine.
Contrast, then, these two acts — ^^a solemn Award

w%\

Parallel Case of Boundary Differences. 79

rendered by a Sovereign Arbiter refused to Parlia-
ment, and a portici; of a case that had to be
submitted to arbitration — made public. Observe
the false declaration to justify the withholding of
the Award, namely, that negociations were pending
where no negociations were pending. There could be
here no matter of negociation ; the Treaty of Ghent
expressly put aside all negociations upon such a
subject, except with reference to the selection of
the Arbiter, and the mode of presenting the case to
that Arbiter. Observe the falsehood of the pre-
text for publishing the Report of the Commis-
sioners — that of hastening the settlement of the
question, when the commission itself was but a
means of postponing a reply to the American
Government, and did suspend the negociation
during a period of two years.

The effect of this publication in England is
equally conducive to the same purpose. Men would
account for the rejection of the award of the King
of Holland by Lord Palmerston*s desire to gain for
England better terms. Nothing then in the natural
objects of the transaction can explain the publi-
cation ; but that publication leads so directly to the
excitement of violence and animosity in the United
States— leads so directly to the perversion of the
integrity and knowledge of the British public, as
evidently to have been the calculated objects which
the British Minister had in view.

But the pretence of sending out the commission
without the American commission was to hasten

80 Parallel Case of Boundary Differences.

the adjustment*. A similar pretext must also have
existed for publishing the report. How is it then
that the report, if publicity for it was required, and
if haste was so urgent, was not published at the
time the commission came home ? Weeks — months
*~more than half-a-year elapses before it is pub-
lished. And what is the period selected for that
purpose ? July 1840, when a treaty was signed
which made France the foe of England — when a
treaty was signed that renders Russia mistress in
Europe and in Asia ; then too was this report pub-
lished, equally to render the United States the foe of
England ; and thus, at once in Asia, in Europe, and
in Amevica, call forth that hostility against England
which, in each and in all, should enable the policy
of the Brunow Treaty to triumph.

Thus after an award had been rendered, the ques-
tion has been re-opened — every step taken has
led to increase of difficulties — no steps have been
taken that can be accounted for by desire to bring
the matter to a conclusion—the question is, at
this hour, unsettled, and each hour increases the im-
probability of a settlement. In the Appendix will
be found p concise statement of the propositions
and the counter-propositions since the parties have
affected to have got id of the award. There also
will be found the discussions upon the subject

* Tlie commissioners performed thtir task with the greatest
haste, heing required to finish their labours within the season,
although they only received their instructions in the month of
July.

Parallel Case of Boundary Differences. 81

in the House of Commons, in which the reader
will find, by comparing Lord Palmerston's state-
ments with himself and with the details given, that
he has falsely represented the facts.

The reader will make the application of these
facts to the case of Mr. M<=Leod ; he will carry
back what he has learned from this case as light by
which to read the intentions of the Minister who
has re-opened the Boundary Differences between
Great Britain and the United States.

PART V.

INTERESTS COMPROMISED ABROAD, CONSTITUTION
SUBVERTED AT HOME, BY THE HOUSE OF
COMMONS.

" Other people, Athenians, deliberate, while ajOPairs are still
pending ; you deliberate, when the event has made counsel of no
avail." Demosthenes.

In face of circumstances the most suspicious, and
surrounded by events the most alarming, a nation
is tranquil and secure, and no thought of causes,
and no apprehension of consequences, disturb the
frivolity of their pursuits, or interrupt the agitation
of their factions.

Men calling themselves instructed, living in an
age which they term enlightened, travel about from
subject to subject, and from interest to interest,
forming opinions without heed or care, and passing
from opinion to opinion, as from subject to subject,
as if believing their minds to \h' of no value — their
thoughts of no import; as if their actM entailed no
consequences, their freedom confe/red no rights,
and that nothing they could do or say a^« ';tt d their
existence, or that of others ? Ajh'r rui avpni
has occurred, the whole nation 10 full of potty
details respecting it, but never fur an instant

■H^

ConstituHoji subverted at Home.

bends its mind to examine the causes which
have led to that incident — the consequences that
may flow from it — the purpose for which it is
designed. Events come upon them like hail or rain,
like sunshine or storm, as things that they may
judge good or bad, pleasing to look at or painful
to endure ; but into the causes of which they can-
not inquire, and over the event of which they have
no control.

How is it that it is necessary to seize and to
grapple with each man before you can get him
to look at any fact in itself, or to conceive that
any two acts of his country can have a common
origin ? Although he knows that one man directs
the policy of England, no Englishman conceives
that there can be any connection between a mea-
sure of England in China, and one in Guatemala ;
or that there is no understanding the onv^ unless
the other is also understood ; that there can be any
conne^i'on between submission to an illegal block-
ade on i\e coast of South America, and the esta-
blishment of one on the coast of the Morea, and
that both must be designed for the same purpose ?

Notwithii tanding this repugnance to examine, is
there any backwardness to form, any slowness to
express opinion ? Notwithstanding this multiplicity
and pertinacity of opinion, 1 never found a man
who did not admit his inability to solve each
difficulty thcit was successively presented to him —
who shrunk from advihtin^ that lie did not compre-
hend the policy of his <'oi(ntry. Notwithstanding

Interests compromised Abroad,

this consciousness of ignorance, I found none who
conceived either ignorance to be criminal, or the
expression of opinions upon subjects he was
conscious he did not comprehend, to be dangerous
or base. Yet it appears to me that no suspicion of
guilt or perception of danger ought to be requisite
to arouse a reasoning being to reflection, and to
impose upon a citizen the duty of investigation. It
appears to me that it is enough that there should be
in the public transactions of the state, that which is
enigmatic — that there should be in the words of a
Minisl*r that which is contradictory — that there
should be in public opinion that which is at variance,
for any rational being to conclude — that the intention
of the actor was the thing to be sought — that it was
the knowledge of that intention, which alone could
solve such difficulties as were to be found — that it was
only in as far as the intention was criminal that dif-
ficulties could exist, or that fahe semblances could
be presented. Diplomatic coni .sion must, there-
fore, spring from crime, and danger must arise, both
from the complications that have been produced,
and by the crime from which they sprung ; so that,
at once, the criminality of the intention becomes the
solution of the difficulty, and knowledge of the
crime the means of averting the danger. Yet, when
this solution is presented to the men of whom this
nation is actually composed, they recoil as if it were
criminal to denounce crime — as if it were not cri-
minal to disregard such a denunciation !

The cause is, that tlit»y are not aware that there is

Constitution subverted at Home.

difficulty to solve, or that there is danger in presence.
Their own thoughts crumbled down, how can they
see system ?— and knowing nothing of those things
that constitute a nation, how can they understand
danger ?

It is not by exposing the mere symptoms of
mental malady that that disease can be rendered
perceptible. Disease of the mind ceases when it is
seen, and nations would not perish if such disease
could be exposed by the speech or the pen. The
time will come, when a few words will j^uffice to
establish the fact of the existence of that same
malady in us, by which other states have perished ;
but it is posterity that will listen to the exposition.
That exposition will be easy when the history of this
people will have been summed up; when it will be —
the British Empire has perished, because the
people was inconstant, factious, corrupt; when
long mismanagement brought about intentional
betrayal, and Russiu enacted on a grander scale the
tragedy of Poland, with this difference, that she
had in the first drama many accomplices, and one
" victim ; and in the latter, the actors were many,
and were reciprocally victims and accomplices."
Still there may be things which, when pointed
out to men, rnay give rise to reflection.

Englishmen ' elieve that they combine in their
form of governmtjit, the special excellencies of those
various forniH that have given splendour, power,
beauty, and permanence, to the mightiest empires
and rei)ublics of ancient ^\^dys. They believe that in

((

Interests compromised Abroad ^

It'!'

England there is monarchical power, limited by
representative wisdom ; they believe, therefore, in the
existence at once of power and of wisdom, and are
satisfied that they possess the means by which
to defend the rights of the state and to maintain the
liberty of the citizens. And with this faith rooted in
their minds, they repudiate the idea of crime in the
highest office of the state, above all, international
crime — that is to say — the betrayal of the whole
state by the very authority constituted for the
maintenance of its rights, because such can be
conceived to exist only in a constitution the most
debased, and amongst men the most depraved.

From this difficulty, common to my fellow-
countrymen, I have been relieved by having come
to the knowledge of the existence of this betrayal,
without having lost myself in speculating on its
possibility. The idea was not one placed before
me to induce me to examine facts, but it came to me
as the solution of difficulties presented by facts in
my possession. With this knowledge did I com-
mence the investigation of the practice of other
governments, in ancient and modern times ; and
the comparison of these with England would now
lead me to look for treason, as a necessary con-
sequence of the changes effected in the British
Constitution and in the mind of the British Nation,
if the knowledge of its existence had not been that
which had IH me to this inquiry, or which had
given me the means of prosecuting it. I now per-
ceive, in the habits of my country, characters which

mm.

Constitution subverted at Home.

coincide with those which are to be detected in
every state that has perished. These are, of course,
not connected with any form of government, for
if so, the opportunity of examining them would
never present itself. Under every form of govern-
ment nations have been great, as under every form
nations have decayed. What we have to look for
is, then, the disease which destroys every constitu-
tion. That disease is disagreement between citizens ;
but each has wandered before a multitude operates,
and that because none see their way. Out of disa-
greement arises quarrel, that is faction — dangerous
in proportion as the opportunities for increasing
confusion are afforded by speech, by writing, and by
making laws. The multiplicity of laws will re-act
upon the disease, to aggravate it — by their very
weight, they destroy the power of the Government,
while the intensity of faction places the nation with-
out the power of acting. Then do men forget those
things, and lose those thoughts, that have given
them the name of a piece of earth for a common
appellation, and which have constituted them one
people ; namely, their rights as a people, the defence
of those rights against all other people ; namely,
i..e mutual affections that spring from these com-
mon necessities, and the duties that spring from
these mutual affections. Unity is the effect and
evidence of the health of a constitution, since it is
found only when the thoughts of the men are
simple ; and unity is found where each man sees as

Interests compromised Abroad,

his neighbour sees, that is, where the common
faculty of vision is unimpaired. Where the
seeds of disease can spring, health has been im-
paired, and the disease having reached maturity,
life becomes extinct. In England, this malady
has long afflicted the state, and has grown
rapidly. The amount of health which remains to
be destroyed within is fearfully reduced*, and the
dangers that oppress the weakened body from
without, have more than in equal proportion in-
creased in magnitude and number. The body, it
is true, is not weak in arms, in riches, in men, in
dominion ; it is great in all those things that are the
physical characters of power ; but these, when misused ,
it is dangerous and not profitable to possess.

The House of Commons, in Great Britain, has
increased in power, and, gradually pressing on the
prerogatives of the highest branch of the constitu-
tion, has ceased to be that which it originally was,
the controller of the expenditure ; it has now become
a governing body. It has destroyed the functions of
the Crown in the appointment of its Minister. It has
also set itself up in opposition to the Law. This
body has thus become the sovereign of the state, and
lias destroyed the authority of the Crown, in regard

* " The rapid fall of England is a very remarkable and
melancholy phenomenon; it is a deathlike sickness, without
remedy." — Neibuhb.

" When schism and faction abound in a state, it is near its
ruin, and ought to be invaded." — Institutes op Timour.

Constitulion subverted at Home.

to those matters— FOREIGN relations, that have
been more specially entrusted to its care.

Regarding these matters, the Parliament is kept
in ignorance while " negociations are pending." If
negociations are pending, it is that there are
complications of which the issue is doubtful ; that
differences do exist which are dangerous, and
it is sufficient for a British Parliament to be told
that doubt and danger exist, for it to abstain from
all inquiry I If it assumed to know nothing upon
the subject, the nation would not trust to its
care, nor confide in its responsibility ; a monarch
might think of the safety of his people, and of
the security of his crown; Foreign states, allied
in interests to Britain, endangered or assailed by the
Minister, might trust in some happy revulsion of
the public mind as a means of safety and redress.
But by its assumption of knowledge, all energy
sinks, and even such chances as might be afforded
to a state without a government, are lost for us ;
false care — ^hollow responsibility, render all within
heedless, and all without hostile. The doctrine that
information is to be withheld while negociations are
pending, invites from the Minister that mismanage-
ment which places each member of that assembly in
the obliged position of an accomplice. " While
negociations are pending, we may pass votes of
censure on the body of the Ministry, but we will
believe nothing, and ask nothing, respecting the
acts of the Foreign Secretary ; we will know
nothing concerning such matters as that Minister

Interests compromised Abroad,

" declares to be unsettled :" — Is not this to hold out
a bonus for incapacity ? Mismanagement has taken
place ; — complicate affairs, and you escape detection.
The mismanagement is by design; — what matters
the intention, when the very fact of mismanagement
secures immunity 1

But while external interests are those alone which
are important, they are also those upon which alone
the executive has any action. All internal matters
are settled by a vote in Parliament, and it matters
not who is your minister ; indeed it little matters
that there should be a government, since it is the
majority of the Parliament that decides. In every
internal transaction every information is granted,
when demanded, and a whole government is held
responsible. In regard to external affairs, so im-
portant, regarding which information is excluded, all
is left to one man. These are the matters which are
difficult, these are the matters in which a premium
may be offered for corruption, in which incapacity
gives to a minister for defence, every foreign
influence hostile to the commonwealth, and in which
even a bribe can be offered with safety and accepted
with impunity. On these matters a House of Com-
mons is satiyfied to wait until matters are no longer
pending — that is to say- — until the evil has been
accomplished, and defers its knowledge until the
period when no knowledge can be of any avail.

Knowledge after events would be useless if
obtained, but the obtaining of it is then impracti-
cable ; and to assert that it is desired, or that it is

Constitution subverted at Home,

{i\

obtained, after events are no longer pending, is to
lie to the nation wliich has ah-eady been betrayed.
If the Parliament honestly avowed that it knew
nothing upon such subjects, men might think, and
hope, and inquire, and their spirits would be aleri
and their senses awake. But as it is, the Parliament
extinguishes our nation's common sense, while
supposed to be the representative of its opinions ;
thus it is that no single individual throughout that
whole people, can be brought to make the efTort
even of thought, until, by heavy blows, dealt upon
him, or a long and studious process applied to him,
all his convictions have been shaken.

For any Minister of England not to seek publicilij,
is to prove himself guilty of all that can render a
Minister dangerous ; that is a total miscomprehen-
sion of the power and the interests of the country
whose destiny he wields. There is no object which
Britain has to desire, to the furtherance of which
publicity is not a means. What then is the Minister
that seeks to conceal ^ — ^What then is » lie Parliament
to which that conceali/»<'nt can be otii -^d as a reason
for withholding from it knowledge of acts by which
it is bound, and for which it is responsible ?

The House of Commons, by appointing the Minis-
ter, or at least the faction from which that Minister
is chosen, becomes, in fact, the Sovereign of the
State, and that sovereign body suffers that the know-
ledge of all public transact!* ;.s should be withheld
from itself ! Figure to yourself the Minister of the
Emperor of Austria, or of liie King of Prussia,

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-S)

{./

< ^"

,V4

4i.

Z
^

1.0

1^ 128 1 2.5
Kt m 112.2

£ lit

I.I I '- i^

L25 i 1.4

1.8

1.6

Photugraphic

^Sciences

Corporation

■^

■<«\

^. -^

; :i WEST MAIM STREET

WEBSTSR.N.Y. 14580

!716) e72»503

^.^ "«.

i)2

Interests compromised Abroad,

v/ithholding from his sovereign knowledge of the
international transactions in which the Government
was involved ! Would you not say, even if this has
not arisen from some perfidious design, that the
state was in peril, and that it would be well for
it if it had no government? What has been the
danger of states from imbecile monarchs, but this —
that the Minister became irresponsible* ?

The governing body of England is not en-
trusted by the Minister of England with his
intentions ; indeed, the servant and the mas-
ter concur in thinking that it would not be safe
for the master to know what the servant was
about to do until it was done; that is to say, the
servant and the master have changed places. The
Parliament has taken the power from the Crown,
the Minister from the Parliament. Yet by an appear-
ance of attending to matters over which they do
in reality exercise no control, they relieve the
nation from care, and therefore from all interest in
their affairs ; while the whole power and influence
of England, united in its Parliamentf , shares against
the nation the responsibility of mismanagement,
leading in its ultimate consequences to the gravest
of dangers that can afflict from within or menace
from without — betrayal and war.

♦ " When a Sovereign does evil, the State may be preserved
by the wisdom of a Minister ; but when a Minister does evil,
what protection remains ?" — Institutes op Timour.

t " The House of Commons is the curse of EnglanJ." —
Expression of Genz^ in 1815.

Constitution subverted at Home.

** But of all tilings, that which is most alarming
to us is this — that our minus are quite alienated
from public affairs ; that our attention is caught
for a moment when some new event has hap-
pened, then each man departs, and not only is
he not moved by what he has heard, but soon
forgets it*." How singular it is to observe the
regularity of the process by which nations fall. Let
any one read this passage, and put himself in the
place of Philip, calculating upon the means of
success afforded him by such mental characters in
that Grecian state, which considered itself in mind
and fortune elevated so far above the Macedonian
" barbarian." The transition will then be easy to
the reflexions of a Russian minister in looking on
Europe.

This body, again so powerful and despotic without,
is so balanced by faction within, that the very Minis-
ter may almost, by his single vote, turn the scale
between contending factions. It is not impunity
that he has to seek for mismanagement ; it is through
mismanagement that he obtains joower,— because the
responsibility of that mismanagement rests on the
shoulders of each individual of the assembly by
which it is not detected, and whose duty it is to
arrest malversation, to detect fraud, and to punish
crime. Thus, himself above party associations or
influences, he can use and command these, so as to
control the government through the Parliament.

* Demosthbnbs.

Interests compromised Abroad,

The Parliament he controls through the acts to
which he can commit it, as minister ; while through
t^e Parliament thus reduced to subserviency, he can
determine the existence of the ministry.

It was the bitterest of reproaches addressed by
Demosthenes to the Athenians, that they, differing
from all people, deliberated when events had made
deliberation of no avail. Might not there still be
some hope for a people to whom such a reproach
could be addressed, and by whom it could be felt?
But what hope is there for a people to whom such
words convey no reproach, and who conceive it a
part of an admirable and scientific system of
government, that while affairs are pending, they
shall not only not delibemte, but not know ?

The monarch irresponsible for results, is he not
powerless ? The Minister uncontrolled, is he not
supreme? The Parliament ignorant, does it not
become his instrument against the sovereign and
the state; and the nation careless, is it not
enslaved ? — enslaved not to a domestic tyrant, but to
a foreign foe ! The Minister is relieved from respon-
sibility by that of the Parliament, the Parlia-
ment is relieved from responsibility by believing
that the Government acts, the nation from care,
by believing that the Parliament understands, so
that there is no authority, responsibility, or know-
ledge ; so that the forms designed to support, and
to shield the state, become the chains by which
it is bound, and the tomb in which it is buried.

Thus are extinguished at once power and free-

Cotistitution subverted at Home.

dom. By repeating the word " constitutional
" monarchy," each man in this island practises
a double deception upon himself. By this decep-
tion it is that power is extinguished, and that
freedom is destroyed ; by this it is that danger is
incurred, not that which an external enemy is
suffered to bring upon us by his own strength, but
the danger of an enemy becoming possessed of the
authority of the highest functions of this empire, to
lead its steps into difficulty, and to cover its eyes
with darkness.

But you will say, supposing this to be true, we
are not in a worse state than France for instance, or
than the United States ; and surely we cannot be in
a worse state than the despotic governments of
Prussia, Austria, and Russia.

But your state has to be examined in itself.
You would not be content with it if it were bad,
because another country was worse ; nor would
the danger, if it was proved to exist, be averted,
because you are not alone endangered. That decay
which I foresee for my own country, I foresee equally
for the rest of Europe, with one exception 5 and
were the alternatives placed before me, I should
prefer to see England perish rather than live on the
condition of imitating that state which, by its mental
superiority to them, has conceived the design of
murder against its compeers. But among coeval
states, equally afflicted with the disease of the age —
equally led victims to the altar of Muscovite ambi-

Interests compromised Abroad,

If- ■

tion, there is not one so far gone as England — not
one so destitute of administrative protection. No
state is so absorbed by faction, and in no other, can
it be said that there is no man, except the individual
into whose hands accident confides the reins of
power, whose duty it is to examine and to under-
stand its public interests.

In the United States, a people composed of
Englishmen, carrying there the thoughts and man-
ners of the constitution, and having adopted, to the
very letter, the laws and forms of England, with the
difference of placing a President in lieu of a Governor,
changes have been effected in regard to the conduct
of external, that is national affairs, of the most im-
portant and impressive character.

A Supreme Court is there established to judge
international questions. On the violation of the rights
of an American citizen, by a foreign state, he is not at
the caprice of a foreign minister, or dependent on the
waywardness of a faction — nor is public right exposed
in his person to such chances — nor is the Government
or even faction, because they have neglected their
duty, exposed to finding themselves the enemy of
the commonwealth. The citizen so injured, appeals
to a court of law, independent of the Government,
above the executive, and the sole interpreter of the
constitution.

A Senate is there also established, having positive
control over all foreign tmnsactions — having a
voice even in the selection of the individuals who

Constitution subverted at Home.

are to fill diplomatic offices, and requiiing the
concurrence of two-thirds of its members in all
such arrangements.

In the congress of the United States, there are
Committees of foreign relations which examine inter-
national transactions.

I pray the reader to compare these wise provisions
with the practice of his own country, and reflect.

But how came the American people to have
thoughts so distinct from that of Britain ? We find
not in the history of time, that nations revert to
truth and to simplicity, no more than the stream,
when it becomes clouded, can regain the purity of
its early spring. The English race transported to
America, how can it have regained that which it had
lost within the limits of Albion ? May it not be
that since their separation, England has changed
from what she was, while her trans-atlantic progeny
has remained in this respect nearer to the original
type ? This is the fact. When the emigration to
the United Colonies took place, there was in Eng-
land the tradition, if not the practice, of an assem-
bly of elders assisting the monarch by their counsels.
In the estimate of that period, foreign transactions
stood as the first and highest interest of the State —
they were subjects deeply interesting to every citizen.

If so, it was natural that the Americans, in con-
structing a new government, should attend to those
matters which all felt to be important, should be-
think themselves of such a body as they left behind
them in England ; namely, a Privy Council. They

Fnterests compromised Abroad,

did so. They did not establish a similar body, but
they considered the functions it had to perform,
and they distributed these with its powers, partly
to a Supreme Courts and partly to the Senate,

The Privy Council, which is now entirely bereft
of deliberative functions and controlling power,
which has now no authority, except in its judicial
character, formerly exercised a decisive influence
on all matters of state, and without its advice no
affair of moment could be transacted. It was
formed from among the men by experience, reputation,
or influence, supposed likely to be able to assist the
monarch by their wisdom, and to give weight to the
acts of the Government by their concurrence. They
were chosen by the monarch ; he selected them, in
order that they might give him strength ; they were
responsible to him for the advice which they gave,
while responsible to the nation for the acts which
he performed. Giving to the sovereign protection
against misrepresentation — giving to him control
over faction — giving to the country a safeguard
against the caprice of a sovereign, the dishonesty of
a minister, the heedlessness of a cabinet.

The sovereign was not bound to accept its coun-
sel, nor to abide by its decision ; but he had the
advantage of hearing what it had to say. It stood
distinct from parliament — it stood distinct from the
ministry — it had no authority, no legislative powers,
no interest, therefore, as a body. It did represent
the feelings of the nation and the knowledge of the
times. It exercised a constant and powerful control

ConstUution subverted at Home.

over the administration of the state, it actetl as a regu-
lator, not a punisher, having the right of foreknow-
ledge of the intentions, and of examination before-
hand of the grounds of all ministerial decisions.
But this body was inconvenient to the Sovereign
and to Ministers ; as the breach of faction viridened,
and as the nation came to be rallied more and more
exclusively under hostile banners, its power decayed,
and it remained without support.

The Privy Council struggled with the Monarch
and struggled with the Nation, through the various
storms of our convulsed Constitution*, down to the
period of the settlement of the succession of the
Crown upon the present Family.

We have, at that period, a remarkable instance of
the progress of administrative decay, and also of
the lingering estimate of the utility of this body
as its functions died away.

In settling anew the succession of the Crown, the
Parliament reconsidered the state of the Common-
wealth, bethought itself of the ancient constitution of
this realm, and introduced a clause for the purpose
of restoring the privileges as well as the responsibility
of the Privy Council, enacting that all such matters
as, according to the laws or the customs of the

* Sir W. Temple laboured to restore the authority of the
privy council, but he laboured in vain, and equally in vain did
he point out the dangers that would follow from the misuse oi
the abuse of that body.

In the last reign there was a private secretary.

In the present, even this security has been swept away.

100

Interests compromised Abroad,

realm, were cognisible in that council, should here^
after be there transacted ; and while it again placed
within the control of the Privy Council all matters
connected with foreign alliancesy it enacted that all
the members of the Privy Council advising or con-
curring in the resolutions adopted, should append
thereto their signatures.

This was enacted in the reign of William; but in
the succeeding reign, another layer of mist having
been spread over the eyes of this people, this statute
was rescinded. Simultaneously with that increase
of faction which gave the House of Commons the
faculty of imposing a body of ministers on the
sovereign, came the loss to him of that counsel,
which afforded him the means of controlling a
ministry of his own choice. Thus the body of
ministers, men accidentally appointed by a majority,
remained uncontrolled by any man, or body of
men whatever, who had the privilege or right of
fore-knowledge of the grounds on which they pro-
posed to act — uncontrolled by any man or body of
men having the faculty to interpose to arrest an
unsound decision.

It appears to me that the absence of such o
body must alarm for the permanency of the state ;
how much more its destruction !

There is no political or historical inquirer that in
any way has weighed this change. There appears
to be no man conscious of it. The silent and
unobserved destruction of this body has taken
place, while the people of this land believe that

Constitution subverted at Home.

101

their state, and therefore their minds, have been
improving.

Thus the difference which we find between the
practice of the constitution of the United States and
that of England, amounts, in reality, to a dif-
ference between England in the eighteenth and the
nineteenth centuries.

From the Hudson let us carry our eyes to the
Bosphorus ; from American republicanism let us
turn to Mussulman despotism, and see what means
are possessed in the systems of Asia for controlling
the conduct of their public affairs. The successor of
the Caliphs is, no less tha'i the President of the United
States, subject to the control of a judicial authority,
placed above the executive, and the guardians of
the constitution. No more has the sovereign of
Turkey, than the President of America, the right
of peace and war*. And the representative of the
chief of the law accompanies, when he crosses the
frontier, the general representing the sovereign of the
state, whose acts are invalid without his legal sanc-
tion. A court of law in Turkey, as in the United
States, is open to the appeal of any Turkish citizen,
injured by a foreign state. Such is public right
wherever Tslamism prevails.

Turn now to any of the military governments of

* By the act settling the succession of the present family, the
right of peace and war, in regard to interests involved in their
continental Dominions, was withdrawn from the Sovereigns of
England.

102

Interests eompromiscd Abroad^

Europe. There is a Sovereign despotic, that is —
Master j consequently that Sovereign is respon-
sible to his people for the results of his use of
power. The Monarch in external questions, can
have no motive, save that of maintaining his King-
dom's honour, power, and rights, and his Ministers
are his servants.

Here no majority fixes ministerial position, or
screens ministerial responsibility ; there is no
balancing between majorities in an assemblage of
disputing Delegates ; no playing off of a Parliament
against a Monarch, or a Monarch against a Parlia-
ment. There is power in the Monarch, because
there is responsibility in the Minister ; and there is
too responsibility in the Monarch, because disasters
are not accounted for by thousands of accomplices
and dupes.

" At all events," it will be said, " France is no
" better off* than we are."

Those matters, vtrhich you neglect calling
them foreign^ France calls national, and places
above internal disputes. In France this sense of
national existence is kept alive by the touch of
foreign soil. Britons in their island have, within
the last half century, lost even the tradition of a
Border. France has a constitution widely differing
from yours. In your constitution there is no body
of men w^hatever, who, upon any occasion, have
any obligation to know anything connected with
public, that is external affairs. In the French
Chamber there ar committees established to ex-

Constitution subverted at Home.

103

amine every separate transaction, to make reports,
and, like those of the committee for foreign relations
of the United States, they guide public opinion ;
they are a perpetual check on the Minister, and
render misrepresentation difficult, and treason dan-
gerous.

Look now and see if you can discover in England
any thing of the kind. Do you find there a Su-
preme Court—do you find an authoritative Coun-
cil? Do you find a House of Lords supervising
foreign relations? Do you find a House of
Commons investigating them, making reports, ex-
amining documents (as in the United States), calling
a Minister before them (as in France), to account for
his conduct ? Do you find a nation sensitive or
informed ? Do you find a Monarch powerful and
controlling? Do you find responsibility hanging
over a Minister, either through the intelligence of the
Nation, or the supervision of authority ? None of
these are to be found. Did ever a state so consti-
tuted live ? The world affords no instance of such
life. Then look at the factions, the depravity that
neglects duty, and that now hails with joy, violence,
rapine, and bloodshed, perpetrated by its own hands
for its own destruction. The heart sickens at such
a display. Good heavens ! is this the state that you
commend ? Is this the empire which you expect to
endure? Is this the society where you believe
treason impossible? Is not such a people un-
worthy of any other fate j and are we not reduced
to that point, where, like Poland, " the nation, by

104

Interests compromised Abroad ^

faction, having placed itself without the power of

action, yields its existence to the caprice or the

treason of a single man*."

We lose then sight of the Minister and the Go-
vernment in the House of Commons ; but then the
House of Commons, is it not the representation of
England ? Is not the whole mind of England given,
and all its efforts directed to composing this assem-
bly of its discordant parts ? Is it not this very faculty
which Englishmen call a righty and by which they
conceive themselves elevated above the other men
existing throughout the world ? Is it not by the
nation's act that these men have been led on the
one hand to neglect that which is important, and on
the other to occupy themselves with that which is
insignificant ? And if this body of men, entrusted
with functions too weighty for them to bear, have
first mismanaged, and then misrepresented affairs,
is it not the nation itself that is to blame, is it not
the nation that has given the power, and that is
to suffer by its misuse ?

In search of the causes of this mismanagement,
we have descended from the Minister to the Par-
liament—from the Parliament we have come to the
Nation, that is to each of ourselves. It is, therefore,
at home that we have to begin to remedy the evil,
and to arrest the danger. In ourselves we have to
detect, and from ourselves to cast away, passions that
flow from factious objects ; and the mental confusion

♦ Vattel.

Constitution subverted at Home.

105

through which we have belonged to a faction, and
have thus become the enemies of onr fellow citizens,
of our country, and rebellious to the laws of God
and man. Then may we receive back to ourselves
charity for our fellow citizens, affection for our
country, and health for our souls. Can any intelli-
gent being stop short in following the chain that
connects the affections of the household with the
destiny of the state, and the permanency of the
political body to which he belongs ; who can speak
of public danger as a thing that regards him not,
whether as to the cause from which it springs, or
as to the consequences which will have to be
endured ; who can speak of public immorality^
excepting as that which he has assisted to produce^
and for which he will bear the penalty ? if so, the
thought of public immorality and of national dan-
ger will not be for him a vague and idle specula-
tion, but will bring feelings of deep contrition, and,
therefore, of usefulness to his country, because to
himself.

He who first transferred to the West some glim-
merings of the thoughts of the East, has left on
record these words : — " Unity amongst citizens, and
" power in the state, are to be found only where the
"-* affections of families are strong." How then can
decay be arresteH, if not by restoring to the mind of
each individual, that healtli thai makes men capable
of loving, and worthy of being loved ? The way
may be long — but is there any other ? The end

1^
^1

'iS'

106

Interests compromised Abroad,

may be beyond our reach, but what other is worth
desiring ?

To return to the case before us. If the explana-
tion which I have given is true, what is the position
of those who do not see it ? Must they not accuse
the Americans for the act of the British Minister ?
Will this crime be excused, or be innoxious because
it is the result of ignorance* ? And would not this
hatred and rancour aroused against the United
States sanction the criminal act of the Minister,
by the counter hostility it will arouse in America
against England ?

Thus will it be not the Minister in the end, who
will appear as the agent in that which he has pre-
pared ; it will be public opinion which will call for

* " While England haa Leen gradually cementing alliances with
the various nations of Europe — aliens though they be to her in
origin, language, interest, and habit, she finds the UnHed States
of America — sprung from the same stock — governed by the same
unrivalled laws — speaking the same noble language, and con-
nected with her by the thousand apparent ties of commercial
interest and constant intercourse, steadily rejecting all attempts
to draw theru into a firm and lasting alliance, fostering every
petty subject of dispute till it festers and indames into a veno-
mous and dangerous ulcer — and allowing every year to leave
wider and deeper than its predecessor, the great gulph which
prejudice and jealousy has opened between the two nations.
What can be the reason of this phenomenon? Why should
America so pertinaciously endeavour to prevent," &c.

While these words are written and printed at Toronto, the
converse of the position is being detailed in the New York and
Boston press.

Constilution subverted at Home.

107

lid

bhe
Ud

— which will appear to drive him on to violence,
although that violence may not appear as flowing
from the present incident, which is but a step in a
long and a tortuous career.

This transaction is not alarming by any thing
connected with America, but alarming as revealing
the position of England — alarming as showing
that none of the functions associated with the idea
of Government are performed, and none of the
rights consistent with the existence of a nation are
maintained — alarming as showing that the neglect
of the performance of duties and the destruc-
tion of lights, are revealed, and that a British
Senate and a British public, neither examines the
cause nor understands the acts, and loses itself in vain
and heedless disputation — alarming by the hope-
lessness of a people which is unable to detect guilt
that is palpable, or to exclude from the conduct of
affairs that idiotcy which it suggests as an excuse
for what it does not comprehend, and dares not
investigate.

I fancy I hear some one a stranger to this island
€xclaim, " If your explanation is correct, there can
be no danger for England, since it is not foreign
hostility, but internal mismanagement which has
brought about these things — it is not foreign foes
with whose powers she has to cope, but internal
Treason which she has to judge. It is not the Con-
stitution that has decayed, but certain individuals,
who have formed a design against it, who are to be
punished."

K^--
P^

108

Interests compromised Abroad,

The corruption of each mind is the bulwark
of that Treason. Who can admit that the whole
powers of the otate are at the disposal of an
enemy, without admitting that every judgment he
has formed is worthless, that every act he has
performed is criminal ? There is the defence of guilt.
Treason can only exist because a nation is blind,
and that which leads to its existence, secures its
inviolability, and its triumph. Its inviolability and
its triumph is this— 'that it cannot be met until it
is understood, and it cannot be understood by such
men as have suffered it to exist ; if it were not so,
bow could nations perish ?

Has he who has perused these pages, rendered to
himself an account of the crime which is involved in
the explanation here given of the case of Mr. M'^Leod?
That crime is not the betrayal which closes the
eye, and allows an enemy to advance to some posi-
tion of neutral advantage, or of doubtful injury ; it
is not the betrayal of the state to the enemy
already an enemy, and whose mind is directed,
and whose power is exerted to inflict injury.
This is a crime, surpassing all that the black-
ness of man's heart has conceived — the energy
of man's tongue has expressed. It is that of
a Minister, who, having acquired full control over
the power of the state, as of the minds of the citi-
zens, has allied himself with a foreign Government,
and has given to it the means of becoming, under
the guise of friendship, a deadly foe; and sits down,
by long deliberation, by scientific calculation, to

h f

•!■

Constitution subverted at Home.

109

exasperate every state against his native country,
quietly, secretly, to undermine rights, laboriously
to create injury, sedulously to expose weakness,
ostentatiously to display injustice. Thus not merely
to render an enemy triumphant, but to lay deep in
the heart of futurity the seeds of continuous and
unremitting hate ; to bring ruin on the land whose
destinies he wields, — to stamp wUh undying infamy
the people he has ruined.

The tongue of our native land, as the instincts of
our human nature, recoil from the conception, and
are overwhelmed with the expression of such infamy
as this ; and it is because this conception is so black,
and this infamy is so fixed, that I, in exposing this
guilt, feel that I have the power to stamp the same
infamy on every man who listens to it, and who
has not the courage to grapple with, and the ability
to master it, and then to repel the false charge, or
to affirm — the awful truth.

I have seized the occasion of this passing incident
in America, as being a likely channel for spreading to
a largernumber of persons the solemn declaration that
a Minister of England is the instrument of a hostile
state ; with that declaration I leave the reader : if it
is false, and he is unable to disprove it, he is no less
base, than, if being true, he remains ignomnt and
inert.

M ■

M;3

1*1

To show that I have done what belonged to one
entertaining such a conviction — that I have asserted

Pit!

110

Interests compromised Abroad ^

it to the highest authority of the State — that I have
demanded inquiry at the hands of the first servant
of the Crown — that I have laid the additional re-
sponsibility of denunciation on the chiefs of both
the factions which divide this land, I subjoin the
following letters : —

London,
August 6th, 1840.

My Lord,

I have to lay before your Lord-
ship the following statement : —

By personal intercourse with Her Majesty's
Principal Secretary for Foreign Affairs, in con-
nexion with public transactions during eight
years ;

By an examination of published Diplomatic
Papers ;

By the study of the speeches of that Minister
in the House of Commons, and of the acts of
Great Britain under his direction ;

I have come to the conclusion that that Minister
is, and has been, acting to further projects of
Russia hostile to Great Britain, using for that end
the power of Great Britain; I, therefore, believe
him to be guilty of High Treason.

To you, as one of Her Majesty's Privy Coun-
cillors, and bound by oath * to do all that a good
and true councillor ought to do to his Sovereign
Lord;* and to you, as head of the Government,
whose concurrence is necessary to the perp3tration
of this crime {if crime there be), and on whom

I)-

Constitutmi subverted at Horne.

Ill

may fall the consequences of this guilt, even to
the penal curtailment of your natural life, I make
thus solemnly the declaration of these my con-
victions — convictions revolting to our nature, and
therefore, admissible only after the most laborious
investigation — convictions now matured by time,
tested by events — supported by the concurrence of
men conversant with public affairs, and recently
and actually engaged in the service of the State.

I have reserved this declaration till sufficient
indications of a change in public opinion had
appeared, to enable you to hope for public sup-
port in attempting to emancipate this Empire;
and the recent act of the Foreign Minister brings
danger too near for any citizen to shrink from
the performance of his duty, or to leave option as to
the selection of time for performing it.

I impose on you now, by this declaration, the re-
sponsibility of inquiry, or of becoming, by refusing
to investigate, accessory to a crime, in the com-
mission of which, because of its heinousness^
accessories are principals.

I have the honour to be.
My Lord,
Your Lordship's most obedient
and humble servant,

(Signed) D. URQUHART.

To the Right Hon.
Viscount Melbourne,
&c. &c. &c.

112

Interests compromised Abroad,

Bittern Manor,
August 2QtK 184a

My Lord Duke,

I enclose to your Grace a copy
of a letter addressed by me to the head of Her
Majesty*'s Government. The same responsibility
that lies on that servant of the Crown lies no less
upon your Grace, through whose support the Mi-
nister charged with the conduct of our Foreign
Relations has been enabled to do what he haa
done, and to involve colleagues in the consequences,
of his acts.

I have the honour to be,,
My Lord Duke,,
Your Grace*s most obedient
and humble servant.

(Signed)

DAVID URQUHART.

His Grace
The Duke of Wellington^
&c. &c. &c.

mm'

113

POSTSCRIPT.

" Bearing over in mind the absolute imposaibility of conquering
our foreign enemy until we have punished those who are serving
him within our walls."— -Demosthenes.

Since these pages were written it is announced
that orders have been sent out to demand the imme-
diate liberation of Mr. M°Leod, and that a squadron
is about to follow that order to enforce it. Concur-
rently with this intelligence, it is understood that
the French Government is to join the Treaty of the
15th of July, and that the affairs of the East are
settled.

After leading step by step the American Govern-
ment into this position, after allowing the debate of
the 7th of February to close and to be sent off to
America without avowing that the destruction of the
Caroline was an act of the Government--after de-
claring that the instructions which had failed were
all the instructions which were now again to be
forwarded — after leading the American Government
on from the position in which it was on the 20th of
December 1837, until in the beginning of March,
1841, when about to bring Mr. M^Leod to trial, it
was encouraged thereto by the parallel drawn by the

114

Postsctipl.

■'I

Foreign Secretary of Mr. M*Leod with the outlaws
tried by the Courts of Canada — how is it that now
we hear that instructions are sent to the British
Envoy at Washington, to demand his passports,
unless Mr. M*Leod is given up? Is this some
novel and contradictory decision, some sudden
awakening, some change in the holders of the reins
of power, or in the intentions of those who possess
them? By no means — it is the consummation of
the past* ; the American Government is led on for a
purpose, and when placed so that it cannot retreat,
then is the result obtained which this labour had
been given to bring about, and put to profit for the
ends for which it was sought.

But it is not across the Atlantic that the causes
are to be traced of these difficulties, it is also else-
where that we must look if we wish to anticipate
the consequences. We have to consider what the
interest of Russia is in this transaction.

Bringing to bear upon this matter the knowledge
derived from the examination of other affairs, we
will at once perceive that Russia has the same inte-
rests to advance in the United States as in every
other country t : — that she has also there to disturb,

* And put in print in these pages before the event was an-
nounced, and in face of the declaration in the House of Commons
of the 7th and 8th February. — Note to Second Edition.

t " To mix ourselves up, at any price, and by every possible
means, in all the complications of Europe."

Political Testament of Peter the Great.

From mixing herself up with complications, Russia has pro-
ceeded now to their production.

I *-

Postscript,

115

rb,

Ible

»ro-

to confuse, to mislead, to involve in foreign compli-
cations, inspire with external ambition, and fears,
and animosities. Putting her direct objects in
America aside, what an enormous instrument in her
hands would not the United States become to act
with upon Europe. Look at the ascendancy which
she secures over England, from the moment that
she has rendered ihe United States hostile to
England. He who does not perceive this, would
not require that proof but that comprehension
should be given to him. Whoever understands
this will be at no loss to see what Russia has to
do to make the United States available ; and what,
supposing she had the control, she would lead Eng-
land to do, in order to render England available, so
that each should become the enemy the one of the
other. That which it would be her object to do,
these pages detail as having been done^.

Russia has turned her face for the moment from
Europe to America, and England, her docile instru-
ment, serves equally her fiendlike purpose against the
one and against the other. Like France, the United
States will be distracted while exasperated, and in-
ternal party will be resolved into foreign faction.
You will have, first, a war party and a peace party ;
then, after that, according to the chances of position
in Europe, you will have an English and a French,

* " If the measures which you take, are such as Philip would
pray the gods that they will inspire you with the idea of per-
forming, can you doubt the cause of your difficulties ?"— De-
mosthenes.

110

Postscript.

or an English and a Russian faction. England, by
assuming a system of menace against America, will
embitter against herself its spirit; she will render
herself, by this new position, the object of increas-
ing dread and alarm to the powers of Europe : —
sentiments of hostility will be encouraged against
her on their part, by thus perceiving the increase of
animosity against her in the United States.

But it may be said these results cannot be worked
out, because there is no escape from the actual posi-
tion, and that immediate war must come. If it was
the design of Russia that war should be immediate,
we would not see amicable arrangements making
with France, nor would the appearance of settling
the Eastern Question be gone through, nor would
apparent harmony be preserved between the great
powers of Europe. If it were the intention of
Russia that there should be war at present between
the United States and England, encouragement to
the United States would be given in a rupture be-
tween England in France, in the menacing attitude of
Russia herself, in the breaking up of the conferences,
and rumours of alarm and practical reverses of Great
Britain in Central Asia. These things, some of which
at least each child knows that it is in the power of
Russia to bring about, do not, at least as yet, ap-
pear ; and we see that done which every child must
know that Russia might prevent, if so disposed.
Russia, therefore, must desire to leave England free
to act upon the United States ; and, therefore, she can
not have the present design of a struggle between them.

Postscript.

117

England free to bring to bear her whole weight
upon America supported at once hy an apparent
union with France, and union with ^Russia, what
balance is left to the United States, especially when
they have been encouraged in the line that they
have taken by the expectation of seeing the one
at open war with England, and the other ready
to join her adversary ?

But the United States Governi .ent having been
led into this position of hostile outrage, it is impos-
sible for it to retract, without an immense sacrifice,
for it will be through dread of war.

Whether we look at the internal, the legal, or
the diplomatic position of the United States in this
transaction — whether we consider the effect it will
have upon opinion within, or the means of com-
pulsion that can be brought to bear upon it from
without, we can turn but from one image to ano-
ther of pusillanimity and of weakness. The casus
belli upon which the American Government and
people will have to decide on the event of a demand
of reparation from Great Britain, will be not only
the subject of division of opinion in regard to its
justice, but of separation of authority regarding
the liabilities of those who have acted, and a
second division of opinion will ensue upon a
question of internal government*. With opinion

* That question of internal government will be brought the
more prominently forward, in so far that the Minister in Eng-
land has hitherto led them on by his knowledge of this means of
action upon their minds. He has encouraged the General Go-

"■'•'I

118

Postscript,

thus distracted — with power thus disconnected)
what will be the effect of the sudden revelation
of the whole power of Britain ready to fall upon
them !

First, — The whole coast of America, and her
commerce, and her existence in that commerce,
are exposed, the one to complete devastation,
the other to instant extinction. Thirty or forty sail-
of-the-line, if necessary, with troops for disembar-
kation, are disposable for su jh an object.

Secondly, — ^The North American colonies have
actually four times the number of troops that they
had when they successfully resisted the three inva-
sions of tl*e United States, and captured three
armies in the last war ; and the spirit of the Ca-
nadas will again be revived by any movement
against the United States. This force is already
on the field of action.

Thirdly, — ^The South is completely exposed to

verament to proceed, by offering to it as an excuse, the separate
powers of the states ; and an agent of his, recently sent to the
United States, lets it out that he had instructions in a cortain
contingency to declare war against one separate state !

I have elsewhere spoken of the comparative intelligence of
the United States and England, in respect to the conduct of their
foreign affiiirs. I referred there merely f.o the checks upon pub-
lic mismanagement, which rendered treason impossible, or much
more difficult than in England ; but as to the general intelligence
of the country upon these matters, of course, there is little differ-
ence between any of the European and Gothic States. Were there
an able man, the Minister of Sardinia, I believe, the dangers of
the world would be averted.

Postscript.

119

the fearful means of aggression which could be
brought by England to tell on that quarter.

If the Seminole war disturbs the repose of
the United States at this moment, and if it be
an object to bring it to a close, with the view
of enabling them to meet a European foe, what will
be the image rising upon their imagination of a
Canadian war of invasion, an Indian war, and a ser-
vile insurrection — a blockade of their whole coast, a
liability to invasion at every accessible p.^int, a total
annihilation of credit and of commerce, with thou-
sands of miles of undefended territory, without a
protecting fortress, with the most splendid means
for transporting an enemy to the heart of their
wealth, population, and power; and thus couped
up while thus exposed, in perfect inability to strike
a single blow at their adversary ! This, in a nation
composed of states distinct in authority, separate
in interest, and in feelings ! Can there be a
question of resistance, and with such means in
reserve, and such threats to use, and such thunders
to call down, will they be spared ? Will they not
have to pass through the agonies prepared now
for them, as hitherto, for the decomposing Govern-
ments and Sti,t€s of Asia and of Europe? Will
they not deserve this fate, they who, like England
and France, presume to deal with diplomatic
affairs while not possessed of a single man un-
derstandiiig them ? And will their fate be a
wai-ning to this land — No, it will be a triumph !
Besides the vision of these physical means.

120

Postscript,

what will be the imp: ession made upon America by
the attitude of England, appearing to their eyes
united with France, at the very moment that
they expected a sudden explosion between the
two countries — arresting to their eyes the designs of
Russia, and compelling from her co-operation and
support — settling the affairs of the East — succeeding
in all she attempts, and triumphing wherever she
appears- — supported with this array of strergth,
and by this accumulation of success, she now turns
round upon America with her united power, and
her undivided energies, turns with the whole of
Europe at her back, not to carry on a war of
aggression, so as to give a necessity for resistance,
so as to unite its opinions while arousing its
energies, but to seek vengeance for a judicial
outrage ! What can follow but submission^ —

f'l

p« ■■

* This effect is already evident in the United States.
" Troubles with England."

" The attentive observer of recent events will not be surprised
that we express the opinion that the course of events on our
Northern and Eastern border is tending rapidly and surely to a
serious rupture, and probably a tear, between the United States
and Great Britain ! This opinion has not been lightly or hastily
formed ; we shall be grateful if the future shall prove it mistaken
— ^but unfounded it cannot be.

" That we are totally unprepared for a war with the most
formidable naval power or \e globe — ^that England would sweep
our commerce from the seas, bum our seaports, ravage our bor-
ders, slaughter thousands of our people, and probably send the
flame of fierce insurrection through our Southern States, before
we could commence the fight in earnest, are obvious enough.

Posiscnpt.

121

submission which will be only gradually re-
quired, and which, as it is yielded, will be en-
forced by a further and a further demand, while
the constant alternative is placed before them of a
small concession at a time, or an impracticable
rupture ?

What, then, will be the position of Great Bri-
tain in the progress of this contest with Ame-
rica, as yet tender and moulding into form ?
She will have triumphed over France, and have
reduced her to subserviency ; she will appear the
arbiter of *^^he destinies of the Ottoman Empire ; she
will ^ppear the controller of the policy of Russia ;
she will, perhaps, be permitted to appear as having
imposed laws on China ; she will, perhaps, be made
to place another monarch on the throne of Persia.
Kjhe will have extended her influence, perhaps her
arms, north of the Paropamisus into the unknown
regions of Tartary*.

In proportion as England will be insecure — in

That we should eventually vindicate our national fame, dr?^'' ♦he
enemy from our territory, and probably retaliate upon them some
of the evils they had inflicted upon us, is very probable. But
would this be worth its cost of one hundred thousand lives,
five himdred millions' worth of property, and the loss of half a
century in the cause of virtue, happiness, and social virtue ? We
think not." — From the New Yorker.

* For the immediate objects of Russia in making England
advance into Central Asia — See " Exposition of Transactions in
Central Asia," Part XIII.

122

PostsvHpt.

proportion as nations will be inspired with hostility
against her — will she appear pre-eminent and pre-
dominant. It is in proportion as she will be reduced
to subserviency to Russia, that this external predo-
minance will be in evidence; and it is by that
reduction of subserviency to Russia that she will be
endangered by the hostility of other nations, and
other nations by her's. For this purpose, the means
are more available for Russia in Asia. This re-acts
upon Europe ; there she will be allowed to appear
as reducing Prussia and Austria to the position of
satellites, in as far as it is necessary to arouse their
ill will. Within the sphere of this action will now
be brought the trans-atlantic regions, and more
especially the United States people and government.
The spirit of the republicans vf\\\ be humbled at
present, but no wound will be closed, and every
sore kept running ; new difficulties will succeed to
these new embarrassments, to satisfy the love of
news and changes — the disputed territory differences
will be worked out, and that sore will be spread
until the whole of the union is infected 3 and when
it is requisite, there is the territory in dispute
to occupy, and the further portions of the union to
invade, to which Britain now lays claim. Thus
will this globe of ours be ripened — be rotted — while
England, in preparing this futurity of desolation for
the human race, will appear elevated to the loftiest
station of human grandeur.

This I tell you before-hand, as the line of

Post scrip/.

123

the accomplishment of the ends of Russia, as the
plain and simple road* for a power to take that
aims at universal dominion when it has got an
agent in the British Cabinejt, which is to lead that
empire, the defence of international right, to do those
things by which international right is destroyed, to
render her own aggressions respectable by the worse
example of the defender of rightf ; and, finally, to
make the eyes of all men and nations turn towar<^ .
her for deliverance from British injustice; to seek
refuge in her against this excess of fortune, and to
prepare men's minds in the person of England for
Muscovite domination.

So it was that Philip decomposed the states of
Greece, the one after the other, and the one by the
other, and he who endeavoured to save Athens,
raised his warning voice chiefiy to make his coun-
trymen comprehend the meaning of the kindnesses
and the end of the favours of the Macedonian.
Having examples around, in states that had sunk

* This elevation of England would be required to sustain the
men or the policy in England, by which these ends are to be at-
tained, only in case the one or the other was endangered.

+ " England, without alarming any state, on the score of its
liberty, because that nation seems cured of the rage of conquest —
England, I say, has the glory of holding the political balance ;
she is attentive to preserve it in equilibrium." — Vattel.

Alas from that England how changed !

" For you are not naturally given to the love of con<iut;c+-
and to maintain the liberty of states is your particular excel' once."
— Demosthenes.

124

Postscript.

before their eyes, he could point to Amphipolis
— Olynthus, and then say in sounds that were
intelh'gible, " after having been for a while gratified
" by the possession of the territory of others, they
" have been despoiled for ever of their ovyn."

125

APPENDIX.

No. I.
Page 29.

** The gigantic schemes of ambition revealed by England
in every quarter of the Ghbe.^

The assault of England upon Central Asia, the
assault of England upon China, opens the two
mighty regions, lying between Russia and India, to
the influence of Russia — ^regions where there was no
possibility of any practical influence of hers, except
through the aggressions and the violence of
England. These acts of monstrous crime do not
bear for Russia that fruit alone which she has to
reap in Asia and in India, but also the fruit which
she has to reap in Europe and in America, by the
hatred she can, by Britain*s act, arouse against
Britain. Thus while, by her agent in the Bri-
tish Cabinet, prolonging the struggle in the Pe-
ninsula, obtaining the partition of the Ottoman
empire, alarming through Naples, Italy and Central
Europe with revolution, does she also obtain that
England should violate international law, and
become feared as an aggressor ? Thereby she
destroys, throughout the world, at once respect for
law and confidence in England : by the first,
lowering the value of every human being on the

126

AjtpcndU:.

I/:S

face iA' the earth ; by the second, anihilating the
power of the state that could alone have resisted
hej". Then, by the very perfection of the system
that carries its threads so far — that gives such
largeness to its design and such variety to its com-
position, is the very idea of system destroyed in the
mind of the close and narrow observer; and being
furnished with a multiplicity of facts which he
does not comprehend, and yet regarding each of
which he is in the constant habit of expressing
tjpiiiions, is inextricable confusion spread over the
world.

The following extract from a French paper may
give some conception of Russia's gain in England's
acts : —

" England has acquired, by the Treaties of 1815, the
strongest positions on the Mediterranean. She possesses
there Malta, Gibraltar, and the Ionian Isles. This was not
enough. She has tai^en possession of St. Jean d''Acre, and
has placed her feet at the same time in Egypt and in Syria.

" In America she possessed twenty-six colonies, embracing
a very extensive territory ; but not satisfied therewith, she
must encroach on the territory of her neighbours.

" She had immense possessions in India — their immensity
did not afford her breathing room, and she found it neces-
sary to seize on two kingdoms in the West, on the peninsula
of Malacca, and the ndjoining provinces ; while in the East,
she has advanced to tlie confines of Afghanistan, and posted
her soldiers on the frontiers of Persia. It was not enough
to possess, in the direction of China, the Prince of Wales's
Island and Singapore, she has thought it necessary to attack
China itself, and has already possessed herself of Chusan.

" In Africa, it was not sufficient to deprive Holland of the
Cape of Good Hope, France of the Mauritius, to oppose our
settling at Madagascar, and to establish settlements there

W''

*■:

Appendiv.

127

herself, she has hemmed in all the coasts of that continent —
she is in Sierra Leone, in Senegambia, on the Grold Coast,
the Ascension Islands, Fernando Po, &c.

" She was not satisfied with having two ports in the Red
Sea, but has taken possession of Aden.

" Are there any other seas, any other continents — seek an
inhabited or an uninhabited spot — where she has not planted
her flag? All lands newly discovered she unhesitatingly
attributes to herself. But yesterday, in violation of all jus-
tice, she issued a decree, by which she takes possession of
New Zealand.

" Where will this insolent usurpation cease ? What ba-
lance can exist in the world in face of this ambition,
which increases with conquest, and becomes extravagant by
dint of impunity ? It is not our nation, but every nation,
which should open their eyes. It is essential, not for a
people, but for every people, to know whether the ocean is
free, and if the universe is to fall back in presence of the
shop-keeping Caesars, who avail themselves of the disunion
of states to turn them all to account, and to aggrandise
themselves on their common ruin/^

National, March 1841.

No. II.

Extract from Mr. Adams's Ze^^er to the Spanish Govern'
ment, November 28, 1818.

The necessity of crossing the line was indispensable,
for it was from beyond the line that the Indians made their
murderous incursions within that of the United States. It
was there that they had their abode, and the territory
belonged in fact to them, although within the borders of
the Spanish jurisdiction. ♦

By all the laws of neutrality and of war, as well as of
prudence and of humanity — he was warranted in antici-
pating his enemy, by the amicable, and that being refused,
by the forcible occupation of the fort. There will need
no citations from printed treaties on international law, to
prove the correctness of this principle. It is engraven in

128

AppendU'.

adanianl on the common sense of mankind — no writer upon
the laws of nations ever pretended to contradict it — ^none of
any reputation or authority ever omitted to assert it.

The President will neither inflict punishment, nor pass
a censure, upon General Jackson for that conduct, the
motives of which were founded in the purest patriotism, of
the necessity for which, he had the most effectual means of
forming a judgment, and. the vindication of which is writ-
ten in every page of the law of nations, as well as in the
law of nature — self-defence.

The obligation of Spain to restrain by force the
Indians of Florida, from hostilities against the United
States and their citizens, is explicit, is unqualified. The
fact that they have received shelter, assistance, supplies,
and provisions, in the practice of such hostilities, from the
Spanish commander in Florida, is clear and unequivocal.
If, as these commanders have alleged, this has been the
result of their weakness, rather than their will, it may serve
in some measure to exculpate, individually, those officers,
but it must carry demonstration irresistibly to the Spanish
Government, that the rights of the United States can as
little compound with impotence as with perfidy.

The United States have a right to demand, as the Pre^
sident does demand of Spain, the punishment of those
officers for this misconduct, and he further demands of
Spain a just and reasonable indemnity to the United States,
for the heavy and necessary expenses which they have been
compelled to incur, by the failure of Spain to fulfil her
engagements to restrain the Indians, aggravated by this
demonstrated duplicity of her commanding officers with
them, in their hostilities against the United States.

No. III.

Contemporary Statement of the Case of the Caroline, in a
New York Newspaper, the " Courier and Inquirer."^

Upper Canada. — The information from the Niagara
frontier, which we publish this morning, is of serious im-

Appendix.

129

port, and well calculated to excite the apprehensions of all
who have at heart the peace and the interests of the coun-
try. A direct violation of our territory has taken place,
and the first feeling of every American should be to repel
it ; but while we thus give vent to our patriotic impulses,
and exhibit a determination which belongs to a great
people, never to suffer an aggression upon our soil, it is
due to justice and to our national character, to pause and
reflect upon the causes which have led to this violation of
our territory, and suffer reason rather than passion to in-
fluence our opinions and actions.

In the first place, then, have we as a government,
faithfully discharged the duty of neutrals, imposed upon
us by the law of nations, by our treaties with England,
and the laws of the land ? We think not. We know
that our governor has issued his paper proclamation against
all interference, and that the general government has called
upon its district attorney and marshal rigorously to enforce
the laws of the United States relative to our national obli-
gations as neutrals ; but we also know, that in the face of
this proclamation, and the call upon two officers of the
general government to do their duty, large bodies of
American citizens, with arms in their hands, have passed
over to Navy Island, a part of the British territory, with
the avowed purpose of making war upon Canada ! This,
it will be said, could not be prevented. We admit that it
could not be with any force at the immediate command of
the Government ; but when this fact became notorious ;
when it was apparent to all that the civil authority could
not prevent these daily and open breaches of neutrality ;
was it not the imperative duty of the administration to
make a requisition upon the governor of this state to order
out the militia, and thus enforce obedience to our own
laws, and to our national obligations ? But no such requi-
sition has been made, no military force has been called upon
to compel obedience to our laws, but day after day they
have continued to be openly violated.

What then ? Did not this inability — for expressing
as we did, a desire to enforce the obligations imposed upon

lao

Ajijundi.r.

us as neutrals, our not succeeding in doing so, was a con-
fcssion of our inahility to do it— did not such inability
give to the Canadian authorities the right to protect them-
selves, even by passing into our country, and thus violating
our territory ? How was it with regard to Florida when
a province of Spain ? We called upon Spain to protect
us from the aggressions constantly made upon us by her
Indians, and we complained that her citizens furnished
them with means to carry on their depredations against our
people. Spain promised to do what was requisite, and
actually issued her orders, as we hear, to prevent these
aggressions ; but she was unable to do what we demanded],
and we, exercising a right secured to us by the law of
nations, took possession of the Floridas, prevented their
longer annoying us, and then declared our willingness to
surrender them to her whenever she was prepared to re-
ceive them, and enforce obedience to the obligations which
the law of nations imposed upon her. England and
every other nation recognised our right thus to act ; nor
has it ever been questioned by any civilized power.

Now let us apply this case to the attack upon the
Caroline. The boat was openly employed, during the
whole of the 30th, in transporting hostile Americans into
the territory of a nation with whom we are at peace, in vio-
lation not only of the law of nations, but of our own statutes
and proclamations. We declared our willingness, as a
nation, to prevent it, but in truth exhibited our inahility
to do so ; and we would ask, whether, under such circum-
stances, the authorities of Canada had not a right to cap-
ture her, wherever she might be, and thus compel that
respect for the rights of a neighbouring r.atirn, which we,
appai'ently, could not enforce ?

AjijHiufi.r.

i:n

No. IV.

Papers presented to Congrctm relative to the Arrest of
Mr. M'^Lkoi), oti account of the Burning of the Steamer ^
" Caroline:'

ME. FOX TO MR. FORSYTH.

Washington, Dec. 13, 1840.

Sir, — I am informed by liis Excellency the Lieutenant-
Governor of the Province of Upper Canada, that Mr. Alex-
ander M'^Leod, a British subject, the late deputy sheriff'of the
Niagara district in Upper Canada, was arrested at Lewiston,
in the state of New York, on the 12th of last month,
on a pretended charge of murder and arson, as having
been engaged in the capture and destruction oi i\\e piratical
steam-boat Caroline, in the month of December 1837.
After a tedious and vexatious examination, Mr. M^'Leod
was committed for trial, and he is now imprisoned in Lock-
port gaol.

I feel it my duty to call upon the Government of the
United States to take prompt and effectual steps for the
liberation of Mr. M^'Leod. It is well known that the
destruction of the steam-boat Caroline was a public act of
persons in Her Majesty"'s service, obeying tbo order of their
superior authorities. That act, therefore, according to the
usages of nations, can only he the subject of discussion
between the two national Governments. It cannot justly
be made the ground of legal proceedings in the United
States against the individuals concerned, who were bound
to obey the authorities appointed by their own Government.

I may add that I believe it is quite notorious that Mr.
M^Leod was. not one of the party engaged in the des-
truction of the steam-boat Caroline, and that the pretended
charge upon which he has been imprisoned, rests only upon
the perjured testimony of certain Canadian outlaws and
their abettors, who, unfortunately for the peace of that
neighbourhood, are still per.xutted by the authorities of the
state of New York to infest the Canadian frontier.

132

AppemUjc.

It <i

The question, however, of whether Mr. M*'Leod was or
was not concerned in the destruction of the Caroline, is
beside the purpose of the present communication. That act
was the public act of persons obeying the constituted au-
thorities of Her Majesty ""s province. TheN,-.*,ionai Govern-
ment of the United States thought themselves called upon to
remonstrate against it ; and a remonstrance which the Presi-
dent did accordingly address to Her Majesty's Government
is still, / believe, a pending subject of diplomatic discussion
between Her Majesty's Government and the United States'
legation in London. I feel, therefore, justified in expecting
that the President's Government wilJ ' i the justice and
the necessity of causing the present immediate release of
Mr. M^Leod, as well as of taking such steps as may be
requisite for preventing others of Her Majesty's subjects
from being persecuted or molested in the United States in
a similar manner for the future.

It appears that Mr. M^'Leod was arrested on the 12th
ult. ; that, after the examination of witnesses, h«. was
finally committed for trial on the 18th, and placed in con-
finei ent in the gaol at Lockport, awaiting the assizes, which
will be held there in February next. As the case is na-
turally occasioning a great d agree of excitement and in-
dignation within the British frontier, I earnestly hope that
it may be in your power to give me an early and satisfactory
answer to the present representation.

I -ivail myself of this occasion to renew to you the
assurance of my distinguished consideration.

Hon. Jc:iN Forsyth^ &c. H. S. Fox.

MR. FOESYTH TO MR. FOX.

Department of State, Washington, Dec. ^6, 1840.

Sir, — I have the honou- to acknowledge, and ha^e laid
before the President, your letter of the 13th iinst., touching
the arrest and imprisonment of Alexander M^^I^eod, a
British subject, and late deputy sheriff of the Niagara dis-
trict, in Upper Canada, on a charge* of murder and arson,
as having been engaged in the capture and destructici of
the steam-boat Caroline, in the month of December 18S7 ;

Appendiv,

133

»s

in respect to which yon state that you feel it your duty to
call upon the Government of the United States to take
prompt and effectual steps for the liberation of Mr. M^Leod,
and to prevent others of the subjects of Her Majesty the
Queen of Great Britain from being persecuted or molested
in a similar manner for the future.

This demand, with the g^ornds upon -which it is made,
has been duly considered by the President, with a sincere
desire to give to it such a reply as will not only manifest a
proper regard for the character and rights of the United
States, but at the same time tend to preserve the amicable
relations which, so advantageously for both, subsist between
this councry and England. Of the reality of this disposi>
lion, and of the uniformity with which it has been evinced
in the many delicate and difficult questions which have
arisen between the two countries in the last few years, no
one can be more convinced than yourself. It is tlien with
unfeigned regret that the President finds himself unable to
recognise the validity of a demand, a compliance with which
you deem so material to the preservation of the good un-
derstanding which h^s hitherto been manifested between
the two countries.

The jurisdiction of the several states which constitute
the union is, within its appropriate sphere, perfectly inde-
peadent of the Federal Government. The offence with
which Mr. M*'Leod is charged, was committed within the
territory and against the laws and citizens of the state of
New York, and is one that comes clearly within the com-
petency of her tribunals. It does nor, therefore, present an
occasion where, under the constitution and laws of the
u-.ion, the interposition called for would be proper, or for
which a warrant can be fiund in the powers with which
the federal executive is invested. Nor would the circum-
stances to which you have referred, or the reasons you have
urged, } .istify the exertion of such a power, if it existed.
The transaction out of which the question arises, presents
the case of a most unjustifiable invasion, in time of peace,
of a portion of the territory of the United States, by a band
of armed men from the adjacenf territory of Canada, the

134

AppendLr.

& '3.

forcible capture by them within our own waters, and the
subseque t destruction of a steam-boat, the property of a
citizen of the United States, and the murder of one or more
American citizens. If arrested at the time, the offenders
might unquestionably have been brought to justice by the
judicial authorities of the state within whose acknowledged
territory these crimes were committed, and their subsequent
voluntary entrance within that territory places them in the
same situation. The President is not aware of any principle
of international law, or indeed of reason or justice, which
entitles such offenders to impunity before the legal tribu-
nals, when coming voluntarily within their independent and
undoiabted iurisdiction, because they acted in obedience to
their superior authorities, or because their acts have become
the subject of diplomatic discussion between the two go-
vernments. These methods of redress, the legal prosecu-
tion of the offenders, and the application of their govern-
ment for satisfactioYi, are independent of each other, and
may be separately and simultaneously pursued. The
avowal or justification of the outrage by the British autho-
rities might be a ground of complaint with the Government
of the Jnited States, distinct from the violation of the ter-
ritory and laws of the state of New York. The application
of the government of the 'iuion to that of Great Britain,
for the redress of an authorised outrage of the peace, dig-
nity, and rights of the United States, cannot deprive the
state of New York of her undoubted right of vindicating,
through the exercise of her judicial power, the property
and lives of her citizens. You have very properly regarded
the alleged absence of Mr. M^^Leod from the scene of the
viifence at the time it was committed, as not mu serial to the
decision of the present question. That is a matter to be
decided by legal evidence; and the sincere desire of the
President is, that it may be satisfactorily established, {f
the destruction of the Caroline was a public act of persons
in Her Majesty's service, obeying the order of their supe-
rior authorities, this fact has not been before communi-
cated to the Government nf the United States by a person
authorised to make the admission, and it will be for the

Appendix.

135

Wi\

court, which has taken cognisance of the offence with whicli
Mr. M'^Leod is charged, to decide upon its validity, when
legally established before it.

The President deems this to be a proper occasion to re-
mind the Government of Her Britannic Majesty, that the
case of the Caroline has been long since brought to the
attention of Her Majesty s principal Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs, who, up to this day, has not commu-
nicated his decision thereupon. It is hoped that ♦he Go-
vernment of Her Majesty will perceive the importance of no
longer leaving the Government of the United States unin-
formed of its views and intentions upon a subject which
has naturif'ly produced much exasperation, and which has
led to such grave consequences.

I avail myself of this occasion to renew to you the as-
surance of my distinguished consideration.

H. S. Fox, Esq., &c. John Foesyth.

MR. FOX TO MR. FORSTflTH.

Washington, Dec. 29, 1840.

Sir, — I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of
your letter of the 26th inst., in which, in reply to a letter
which I had addressed to you on the 13th, you acquaint me
that the President is not prepared to comply with my de-
mand for the liberation of Mr. Alexander M'^Leod, of
Upper Canada, now imprisoned at Lockport, in the state
of New York, on a pretended charge of murder and arson,
as having been engaged iu the destructiofi of the piratical
8tear> hnat Caroline on the 29th of December, 1837.

I >*■ ' ' with deep regret that such is the decision of
the ' ' V id nt of the United States, for I cannot but foresee
the very j,mve and serious consequences that must ensue, if,
besides the injury already inflicted upon Mr. M^'Leod, of a
vexatious and unjust imprisonment, any further harm
should be done to him in the progress of this extraordinary
proceeding.

I have lost no time in forwarding to Her Majesty's Go-
\v Timent in England the correspondence that has taken
p?p e, and shall await the further orders of Her Majesty''s

136

Appendir.

Goverament with respect to the important question which
that correspondence involves.

But I feel it my duty not to close this communication
without likewise testifying my vast regret and surprise at
the expressions which I find repeated in your letter, with
reference to the destruction of the steam-boat Caroline. I
had confidently hoped that the^rst erroneous impressions
of the character of that event, imposed upon the mind of
the United States' Government by partial and exaggerated
representations, would long since been effaced by a m^re
strict and accurate eccamination of the facts. Such an
investigation must even yet, I am willing to believe, lead
the United States' Government to the same conviction with
which Her Majesty's authorities on the spot were impressed,
that the act was or?, in th<> strictest sense of self-defence,
rendered absolutely necessai^ ' ihe circumstances of the
occasion, for the safety and protc . n of Her Majesty's sub-
jects, and justified by the same motives and principles
which, upon similar and well-known occasions, have go-
verned the conduct of illustrious officers of the United
States.

The steam-boat Caroline was a hostile vessel, engaged
in piratical war against Her Majesty's people, hired from
her owners for that express purpose, and known to be so
beyond the possibility of doubt.

The place where the vessel was destroyed was nomi-
nally, it is true, within the territory of a friendly power ;
but the friendly power had been deprived, through over-
bearing piratical violence, of the use of its proper authority
over that portion of territory. The authorities of New
York had not even been able to prevent the artillery of the
state from being carried off publicly, at mid-day, to be used
as instruments of war against Her Majesty's subjects. It
was under such circumstances, which it is to be hoped will
never recur, that the vessel was attacked by a party of Her
Majesty's people, captured, and destroyed.

A remonstrance against the act in question has been
addressed by the United States to Her Majesty's Govern-
ment in England. I am not authorised to pronounce the

Appendix.

137

decision of Her Majesty's Grovernmeiit upon that remon-
strance, but I have felt myself bound to record, in the mean
time, the above opinion, in order to protest in the most
solemn manner against the spirited and loyal conduct of a
party of Her Majesty's officers and people being qualified,
through an unfortunate misapprehension, as I believe, of
the facts, with the appellation of outrage or of murder.

I avail myself of this occasion to renew to you the
assurance of my distinguished consideration.

H. S. Fox.

ME. FOESYTH TO ME. FOX.

department of State, Washington, Dec. 31, 1840.

Sir, — I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of
your note of the ^rd inst., in reply to mine of the ^6th, on
the subject of the arrest and detention of Alexander M'^Leod,
as one of the perpetrators of the outrage committed in New
York, when the steam-boat Caroline was seized and burnt.
^uU evidence of that outrage has been presented to Her
Majesty's Government with a demand for redress, and of
course no discussion of the circumstances here can be either
useful or prop», nor can I suppose it to be your desire to
invite it. I take leave of the subject with this single re-
mark, that the opinion so strongly expressed by you on the
jfacts and principles involved in the demand for reparation
on Her Majesty's Government by the United States, would
hardly have been hazarded had you been possessed of the
carefully-collected testimony which has been presented to
your government in support of that demand.

I avail myself of the occasion to renew to you the as-
surance of my distinguished consideration>.

John Forsyth.

Vo. V.
DISCUSSION IN PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LOEDS.

Feb. 8th, 1841.
Lord MouNTCASHEL having put some questions rela-
tive to Mr. M'Leod,

K •

138

Appendix.

Viscount Melbourne said he would not enter into the
statement and arguments made use of by the noble lord,
but simply confine himself to answer the questions — (hear).
Her Majesty's Government certainly received information
that an individual of the name of M^Leod, a British subject,
had been arrested by the authorities of New York, on a
charge of arson and murder, stated to have been committed
by him on the occasion of the destruction of the steam-boat
Caroline. Immediately on hearing of the charge made
against this individual, Mr. Fox, our minister at Washing-
ton, had demanded his liberation from the general Govern-
ment. He had received a reply, stating that the matter
entirely rested with the authorities of the state of New
York, and that it was neither in the power, nor was it the
intention of the general Government to procure his libera-
tion. That was the position in which the matter at present
stood. As to what Her IMajesty's Government meant to do
under these circumstances, he (Lord Melbourne) was sure
their lordships would not, in the present state of the subject,
consider that he was called upon to give any answer —
{hear^ hear). At the same time, he could assure the noble
lord and the House that Her Majesty's Ministers had taken
every means in their power to secure the safety of Her Ma-
jesty's subjects, and the preservation of the honour of the
British nation — {hear, hear).

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

February 8th, 1841.
Lord Stanley having stated the case of Mr. M^Leod,
said, that inasmuch as negociation had commenced upon
the subject of the burning of the Caroline, since January
1838, between Her Majesty's Government and the Govern-
ment of the United States, he wished to ask, in the first
place, whether Her Majesty's Government would have any
objection to lay on the table the entire of the correspond-
ence which had taken place upon the subject of the destruc-
tion of the Caroline ? and, also, whether the despatches had
all been received, which had been referred to by Mr. Fox
in the recent accounts, and particulaily that which had
been transmitted on the S9th of December last, announcing
the apprehension of Mr. M^'Leod. He (Lord Stanley)

Appendix.

139

beggetl to ask further, whether Her Majesty''s Government
had taken any steps towards procuring the release of Mr.
IVfLeod from his present confinement ? and, if so, whether
they would lay upon the table the nature of those steps,
and the correspondence which had passed upon this subject
between the Government of the United States and Her
Majesty's Ministers.

Viscount Palmerston rose and said, the noble lord
had adverted at much length to a subject of extreme in-
terest, and which, from the great delicacy of its nature,
involved considerations of a grave and serious character to
two great countries — {hear). He (Viscount Palmerston)
was sure that this House would think with him that this sub-
ject should be touched very lightly and with great delicacy
— (* hear, hear , from the ministerialists). With reference
to the statement which had just been made by the noble
lord, the member for North Lancashire, as to the proceed-
ings which had taken place relating to the subject before
them, and the particular circumstances which preceded the
apprehension of Mr. M^Leod, they were strictly correct.
He (Viscount Palmerston) would first answer the question
which the noble lord (Stanley) had put to him, before he
would state one word in explanation. He thought it would
not be expedient in the present state of the question to lay
upon the table the correspondence relating to the capture
and destruction of the Caroline, until that correspondence
was brought to a final close — (* hear, hear^ from the mi-
nisterialists). He begged to inform the noble lord that
despatches had been received, enclosing copies of the cor-
respondence which had taken place between Mr. Fox and
Mr. Forsyth, the Foreign Minister of the United States
Government. These notes had been already published in
the American papers, and he (Viscount Palmerston) would,
of course, have no objection to lay those documents which
had been already published on the table — (laughter). But
this was a departure from what he considered an important
rule in regard to international affairs — (hear, hear) — and
one which might operate injuriously to national interests, to
lay before parliament documents relating to pending discus-

ii!
;i|

mi
lit'

•ii

140

Appendix.

l\ m

sions. He thought it important to make, with reference to
the notice to Mr. Forsyth, one observation. The noble
lord (Stanley) had said, that he believed Mr. M^Leod
was not one of the party by whom the Caroline had been
attacked. His (Lord Palmerston^s) information went pre-
cisely to the same conclusion — that he, Mr. M'^Leod, was
not a member of the party that was concerned in the de-
struction of the Caroline ; but with regard to the ground
taken by Mr. Forsyth in replying to Mr. Fox, he (Lord
Falmerston) thought it right to say that the American Go-
vernment undoubtedly might have considered this transact
Hon either as a transaction to he dealt with between the
two Governments, by demands Jhr redress, on the one
hand to be granted, or refused on the other, and to be
dealt with accordingly ; or it might have been considered
as the British authorities consider proceedings between
American citizens on the British side of the border, as
matter to be dealt with by the local authorities. But the
American Government had chosen the former course, by
treating this matter as one to be decided between the two
Governments, and this was the ground on which they were
entitled to demand redress from the British Government
for the acts of its subjects. He was sure the House would
think with him, that in a matter of such extreme difficulty
it would be improper foi him to enter into any ftlrther re*
marks or observations, and he would therefore content him^
self with answering the noble lord's questions by stating
those important facts which he had then mentioned.

Lord Stanley said that the noble lord who had just
sat down had omitted to answer one question which he
(Lord Stanley) considered to be of the deepest interest.
That question was, whether the noble lord (Falmerston) had
taken any steps, and if so, what those steps were, for the
protection and liberation of Mr. M^Leod— (Aear, hear).

Viscount Falmerston said that a case somewhat simi-
lar in principle to the present was expected about a year
and a half ago, and instructions were s^nt at that time to
Mr. Fox, on which he founded the communication he made
to the American authorities. Of course the House would

Appendix,

141

suppose, he trusted, that Her Majesty^s Government had
already sent certain instructions, but until the correspond-
ence upon the subject had concluded it was impossible to
send any instructions that could be considered final. He
hoped the House would believe that the Government would
send to Mr. Fox such further instructions as they might
think it their duty to do ; at the same time he was not pre-
pared to state what the nature of those instructions were— ^
{hear).

Mr. Hume said he wished to ask the House to suspend
their opinion upon the subject until they had the whole of
the papers laid before the House. He had himself papers
in his possession that would explain many things connected
with this question, and which, by-the-bye, were not exactly
consistent with the statement which had just been made.
By the statement which had taken place in the House of
Congress, it appeared that the Government of the United
States had been ignorant of any information that could lead
them to suppose that the enterprise against the Caroline
had been undertaken by the orders of the British Govern-
ment or by British authority. That he belie\ cd was the
ground upon which Mr. Forsyth had acted as he had done.
He takes his objections, and denies the allegation of Mr.
Fox, that neither had he nor Her Majesty's Government
made any communication to him or the authorities of the
United States that the British Government had authorised
the destruction of the Caroline. He (Mr. Hume) therefore
hoped that no discussion would take place until all the pa-
pers connected with the matter were laid before the House.
He wished to know what the nature of those communica-
tions were with Mr. Stevenson and Her Majesty's Govern-
ment which had induced him to act as he had done ?

Viscount Palmekston said that he rather thought his
hon. friend would find in that correspondence that instruc-
tions had been given by the American Government to Mr.
Stevenson to abstain from pressing the subject further —
(hear). With regard to the letter of Mr. Forsyth, he
(Viscount Palmerston) begged leave to say that the case

142

Appcndiv.

stood thus : — In the case of the American citizens engaged
in invading Canada, the American Government disavowed
the acts of those citizens, and stated that the British autho-
rities might deal with them as they pleased — {heatj hear),
and that there were persons concerned in this undertaking
who were not in any degree entitled to the protection of the
United States — (hear). But in the other case they treated
the affair of the Caroline as one to be considered as that of
the Government, and in fact assumed it to be altoget^.er a
Government transaction, and not to be left upon the respon-
sibility of individuals. Until, therefore, the British Go-
vernment disowned those persons concerned in the destruc-
tion of the Caroline in the same manner as the American
Government had disavowed their citizens in the other case,
he conceived that the American Government had adopted
an international responsibility in the late detention of Mr.
M'^Leod, and could not therefore change their ground upon
this question — (hear, hear).

Sir R. Peel wished to a. ': the noble lord a question
relating to a matter of fact. He believed that, in the ex-
pedition which had been formed for the destruction of the
Caroline, certain officers who held commissions in Her Ma-
jesty^s army and navy were concerned in that affair, and that
some of these officers had, in the execution of the orders
which were issued, received wounds. The question he
wished to ask was, whether or not Her Majesty^s Govern-
ment had thought proper to award pensions to those officers
corresponding in amount with those which were usually
granted for wounds received in the regular service of Her
Majesty ?

Lord J. Russell said that he was not aware of any pen-
sions having been granted to those officers who were wound-
ed in the expedition against the Caroline.

Sir R. Feel, in proposing another interrogatory, read
a passage from the speech which had been delivered by Her
Majesty on the opening of Parliament in 1 839, which stated
that differences which had arisen had occasioned the retire-
ment of her minister from the court of Teheran, but Her

Appendix.

143

Majesty hoped that a satisfactory adjustment of those differ-
ences would allow of the re-establishment of her relations
with Persia on their former footing of friendship.

Mr. 0'*CoNKELL begged pardon for interrupting the
right hon. baronet^ but he thought they ought to leave all
other subjects until they had been satisfactorily informed
upon the subject of Mr. M*Leod — {hear and cheers). Let
it be recollected that perhaps the life of a British subject
was at present at stake, and he was sorry that his hon. friend
(Mr. Hume) had taken such a course, because he (Mr.
O'Connell) thought that upon this subject, at all events,
there ought to be a unanimity of feeling — (Aear, hear).
He thought that every exertion should be made to have Mr.
M°Leod saved, as he had acted nnder the command of the
officers of Her Majesty''s Government, and it was in the
strict performance of his duty he had incurred the danger
with which he was threatened — {hear, hear). Whether
those orders had been right or wrong, this Government was
bound to give him every protection possible. {Cheers from
all parts of the House.)

Mr. S. O^BaiEN here rose to address the House, but
was interrupted by

The Speaker, who observed, that at present there was no
question before the Chair ; but he begged leave to remind
the hon. member that the right hon. baronet had risen to
ask a question, under which circumstances he considered
that the right hon. baronet the member for Tamworth was
then in possession of the Chair.

Sir R. Peel said he had been reading a passage from the
speech from the throne in 18d9> and he would now read a
passage from the royal speech at the opening of the session
in 1840: ** I have not yet been enabled to establish my
*< diplomatic relations with the court of Teheran, but com-
" munications which I have lately received from the Persian
" Government inspire me with the confident expectation
'* that the differences which occasioned a suspension of those
'< relations will soon be satisfactorily adjusted." He now
wished to ask the noble lord (Palmerston) whether those
differences had been satisfactorily adjusted, and whether

144

Appendix^.

they had renewed their diplomatic relations with the court of
Persia ?

Viscount Palmeeston said he was sorry to inform the
right hon. baronet that those differences had not yet been
finally or satisfactorily adjusted. The House was aware
that Her Majesty^s Government had made certain demands
on the Persian Government for redress of certain wrongs^
which consisted in ilUtreatment visited towards those con-
nected with the British mission, and certtun British autho-
rities ; and another ground of complaint was that Persia
still maintained possession of the city of Heratf which
belonged to the Indian territory (!) Ou the several points
of individual grievances, they had received explanations
and assurances, which if they did not amount altogether to
a literal fulfilment of the demands, yet appeared to them
such as that they might, without derogating from the
honour of the country, say they had received sufficient
satisfaction. It was on the territorial claims alone that
there lay any differences between the two Governments.
As to the missions, they would henceforward not be in any
way unduly interfered with.

Sir R. Peel wished to know whether there would be
any objection to lay before the House such information^ as
might enable them to form some judgment on the present
state of our relations with Persia ?

Lord Palmekston said he had stated the substance of
the communications, and he had no objection to lay them
before the House.

February 9.

Lord Stakley begged to ask the noble lord for a more
explicit imd satisfactory answer, as to the question which he
(Lord Stanley) had put to the noble lord, which was,
whether any steps had been taken by Her Majesty^s
Government, and if so, what steps were, for the liberation
of Mr. M^Leod ? The noble lord (Palmerston) had cer-
tainly answered him by saying, that they * will take, and
< indeed have taken, such steps as they deemed necessary
* for the purpose.' These he (Lord Stanley) believed
were the actual words w^ by the noble lord, the Secretary

Appendix.

145

for Foreign Affairs. Ke (Lord Stanley) did not, of course,
ask him further as to what the nature of those steps were, if
that noble lord thought proper to withhold that information,
but he did ask him whether he had taken such steps for
the protection and liberation of Mr. M'^Leod (who had been
apprehended on the 12th of November, 1840), as would
be effectual in point of time in reference to the proceed-
ings then going on? He distinctly wished to ask that
question.

Lord Palmerston — ^With respect to the other question,
what he had to state was this. A case of a somewhat
similar nature happened, or was about to happen, a year or
a year and a half ago ; and upon that occasion instructions
were sent out to Mr. Fox, laying down what the Government
thought were aotmd principles in the emergency. At that
time it was rendered unnecessary to act upon the instruction ;
but the case having now actually occurred, Mr. Fox, with-
out waiting for further instructions from home, acted upon
the former instructions, and made the demand upon the
American Government for »,he liberation of M- M^'Leod.
He then reported the whole case to the Grovernment, but
from various causes that communication had been much
longer on its passage than usual, and it was only a few days
ago that he had received the final portion of what had taken
place between Mr. Fox and the American Grovernment ; it
was, therefore, only that day that an opportunity had pre-
sented itself for sending out final and conclusive instructions
— they were then ready prepared, and were on the point of
being sent off; but what the nature of those instructions
was, neither the noble lord nor the House would then expect
bim to say. Mr. Fox had founded his remonstrances with
the American Government upon instructions sent him by
the Government respecting a case of a similar nature,
which it was feared would have occurred.

Lord Stanley — The noble lord had not as yet an-
swered iiis question. He (Lord Stanley) wished to ask the
noble lori again, whether subsequent to the information
which had been received of the apprehension of Mr. M^Leod,
he, or any member of Her Majesty's Government, had

146

Appendix.

taken any immediate steps on the subject, and had forwarded
any communication to their minister at V^'ashmgton ?

Lord Palmeeston — Yes; and the instructions which
were given were precisely to the same effect as ihose which
were stated as having been given in the former case. It
was not until Saturday last that the Government had
received from Mr. Fox the last communication respecting
the result of his correspondence with the authorities of the
United States.

Mr. Httme said he wished to put a question to the noble
lord. He (Mr. Hume) hdd in his hand t'ue r^der which
had been issued in 1837 by the Commander-in-Chief in
America, which announced his Excellency s great satis-
faction at the destruction of the Caroline, which the order
stated was effected in a manner highly creditable to those
engaged in that expedition ; that the result had met with
his Excellency's unqualified approbation, and he would
think it his duty to make known the whole affair to Her
Majesty^s Government. He (Mr. Hume) wished now to
ask the question — whether there evei had been a communi-
cation to Her Majesty's Government upon the subject, and
whether they had ever signified their approbation of that
act?

Lord J. Russ£LL acknowledged that such a communi-
cation had been made by order of the Lieutenant-Governor,
who was then Sir Francis Head, who had entirely approved
of what h&d been done, and had informed Her Majesty's
Governrient of all the circumstances connected with it.
He (Lord J. Russell) believed the purport of the hon.
gentlemaa's question to be, whether the Lieutenant-Governor
had represented the view which Her Majesty's Government
hail taken of the case. He thought that his no%le friend
the Secretary for Foreign Affairs had already answered that
quetition. (Cheers.)

Mr. Hume again attempted to speak, but was antici-
pated by

Mr. T. DuNCOMBE, who begged to ask a question of
the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, which he
thought was highly necessary to complete the discussipn

Appendix.

147

upon this subject. He wished to ask the Foreign Secretary
whether the Government had adopted the act of Captain
Drew and the capture of the Caroline as their owuj and
thereby, of course, approved of same ?

Lord Palmebston — If the hon. member meant to ask
whether Her Majesty's Government did or did not consider
tht captu** ' the Caroline a just proceeding, he (the noble
lord) would say that undoubtedly Her Majesty's Govern-
ment did consider it a proceeding perfectly justified ; for it
was one deemed necessary for the defence of Her Majesty's
rights — {immense cheering from the ministeriaJiats, echoed
back by the opposition side of the House).

Mr. Hume theu asked whether the nobie lord or Her
Majesty's Government had ever signified that opinion to the
Government of the United States.

Lord Palmerston said that such opinion was com-
munic£.ted both to Mr. Stevenson, the ministe.r of the
United States here, and also to the American Government,
through Mr. Fox.

March 5th.

Mr. S. O'Brien said, that before the Speaker left the
Chair he was anxious to say a few words on the state of our
relations with the United States of America. Two cir<:um-
stances were stated in tiie newspapers to have occurred
recently, which if true deserved the immediate notice of the
House of Comraonp. The first was that a true bill had
been found in the United Stated against Colonel M'^Leod
for murder and arson, on the allegation that he had been
present at a transaction ordered by the colonial authorities
of Canada; and the second was that the Legislature of
Maine had recently passed these two resolutions : — " That
** the Governor be authorised to take immediate measures
'* to remove the troops of the Queen of Great Britain now
" quartered on the territory called * disputed' by the
" British Government ; that the resources of this state be,
*' and they are hereby, placed at the disposal of the
<< Governor, and the specific sum of 400,000 dollars be

148

Appendix*

and the same hereby is, appropriated out of any money
in the Treasury, for the purpose of carrying the said
" resolutions into effect.''^ He did not know what
authority there was for believing these resolutions to be
genuine ; but if they were authentic, they amounted to
nothing else than a declaration of war against Great Britain.
(Hear, hear.) He was more adverse to war than any
individual in that House. He looked upon a war with the
United States as one more to be deprecated than any other,
inasmuch as it must be of a fratricidal character. {Hear,
hear.) He likewise saw that the vast commercial interests
of this country must be exposed to disaster by its continu-
ance. Still, if war did take place on the present occasion,
it would not be a war of our seeking. Besides, we ^'hould
lose our high character as a nation, if we did not defend our
colonies, when attacked ; neither could we claim their alle-
giance, if we did not give them protection, when they were
acting under our authority. (Hear, hear.) He had seen
a great exertion of our vigour under the auspices of the
noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs in another part of the
globe, where the exercise of our vigour was of a more
ambiguous character than it would be on the present
occasion ; and he trusted that the noble lord would on this
emergency display the same vigour which he had displayed
elsewhere. His movements, however, were so secret ; and
he did not blame the noble lord for it ; that the House had
no opportunity of forming an opinion upon the efficacy of
his directions. {Hear, hear, from the Opposition benches^
It was, however, his duty, as a member of Parliament, to
say that our interests would be better secured than they
were at present in case we had a strong fleet in front of the
harbours of the United States, and a strong army on the
frontiers of British America. He left it to the Government
to say whether the naval and military estimates were on a
sufficiently large scale to meet every contingency that might
arise in that quarter of the globe. (Hear, hear.) If they
were not. Ministers would be wanting in their duty if they
did not come down to Parliament and ask for such sums as

Appendix.

149

woulrl enable them to meet every contingency. (Hear,
hear.) He was sure that the Rouse would willingly com-
ply with any demand which would enable them to secure
the honour and interests of the country. {HenVf hear.)

Mr. EwART did not see the necessity for anticipatmg dif-
ferences between the two countries. He believed that the
great body of Americans were inclined to peace with this
country ; they knew their own interest too well, he believed,
to wish for war. He trusted that the unhappy discord
which it appeared existed at present might pass off without
evil results ; and he was confident that if it did, not only
the interests, but the wishes, of both nations would be
satisfied.

Mr. Hume hoped that the noble lord 'Vould be able to
satisfy the House and the country by some statement on this
subject (cries of * Oh /"*) and remove any prejudice which
might be occasioned by silence. He (Mr. Hume) was of
opinion that there was no ground for immediate interference.
He thought that nothing had taken place in America but
what had been done under the civil law. It was manifestly
too soon to appeal to war when they were not informed that
any thing had taken place which was not in accordance with
the laws of those countries in which they had taken place.

The House then went into Committee.

Sir R. Peel — But, when he looked to the United States,
and beheld the state of feeling which existed there — when
he viewed their proceedings against, and coi uied deten-
tention of, Mr. M*'Leod — when he heard from the noble lord
that a representation had been made to the Amer-can
Government that the destruction of the Caroline must b'
regarded as the act of the English Government — when he
understood that orders had been sent out to demand
peremptorily the liberation of Mr. M°Leod — and when he
thought on what had since occurred, without, as had been
observed by the noble lord, entering into recriminations in
reply to observations made in the Congress of America, that
great country which he always treated with the most sincere
respect, and an interruption in our amicable relations with

160

Appendix.

which he should most deeply deplore ; when he thought on
all these nircumstances, he could not think that a sound
policy which would seek to purchase a hollow truce by
unjust concessions. (Hear, hear.) He hoped that we
should never forget the claims which the North American
provinces, who had shown themislves so faithful to British
connexion, had on this country ; and whilst he would sin-
cerely deplore a war with any country, and more especially
with that country, which had so many claims on us, sharing
the same descent and speaking the same language, yet, if
the interests of his country required the vindication of
British honour in resistance against wrong, all his desires
l:bi' peace would vanish before his determination to stand by
the cause of his country. (The right hon. baronet, who
towards the conclusion of his sentences occasionally dropped
his voice to so low a pitch as to be nearly inaudible in the
gallery, resumed his seat amidst great cheering.)

[addition to third edition.]

April 6th.

Lord Palmebston observed that his honorable friend
the Member for Kilkenny, had a notice on the paper for
copies of the correspondence that had taken place between
the Agents of the United States and Her Majesty's Grovern-
ment respecting the destruction of the steam-boat Caroline.
He (Lord Palmerston) had to request that his honorable
friend would not now pr<;ss the question on the consideration
of the House — (hear, hear). He (Lord Palmerston) trusted
that, on the part of both Governments, thpre was an anxioup
desire that the negociations respecting this matter should be
brought to an amicable and satisfactory termination — (hear,
hear). But still there were points connected with it which
had excited a very strong feeling, both in this country and
on the other side of the Atlantic ; he would therefore put

Appendix.

151

it to the consideration of his honorable friend, whether it
would not be advisable at present, while the question was
still the subject of communication between the two Govern-
ments, to abstain from introducing any motion which must
necessarily be followed by a discussion on details that
would most likely have the effect of defeating the wish,
not only of his honorable friend, but also the desire of the
English Government and the Government of the United
States — {heart hear). He hoped, therefore, his honorable
friend would agree to postpone his motion until a later
period of the session, before which time, probably, the ne-
gociations now pending between the two countries would
have come to an issue — (hear, hear).

Mr. Hume had no objection to acquiesce; he would,
therefore, postpone his motion till after the recess, by which
time he trusted the noble lord would be able to communi-
cate to the House information upon this painful subject, of
a conclusive and satisfactory description — {hear, hear).

No. VI.
BOUNDARY QUESTION.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

July ISthy 1840.

Sir R. Peel said that early in the present Session of
Parliament, he had called the attention of the noble lord
opposite, to the necessity of laying before the House certain
papers then in the hands of Government, with respect to the
Boundary Question. On that occasion he had received a
positive assurance from the noble lord that they should be
laid on the table of the House immediately before the hoH>
days.

Viscour* Palmerston admitted that he must take
upon himself all the responsibility of the delay. The

/ I

152

Appendix,

report was not yet ready*, and he was anxious that the
report should be presented to the House at the same time as
the papers to which the right hon. baronet referred.

Sir R. Peel asks if they will be given in eastenao ? The
answer is yes ; and that fresh surveyors have been sent
for part of the line which had not been well surveyed.

Another question is then put on quite another subject
to Lord J. Russell, after which Lord Palmerston again
rose, and said that he thought it might be satisfac-
tory to the House to know that Her Majesty'*8 Govern-
ment had sent out a proposition in answer to one which had
proceeded from the United States, and which had reached
this country in the course of last year. The proposition
thus transmitted was accompanied by the draft of a Con-
vention, which he had no douhi would have tfie effect
of bringing the whole question to a final and satisfactory
issue.

Sir R4 Peel inquired if the terms of the proposition to
which the noWe lord referred, took for its basis any other
proposition which had proceeded from the United States, or
was altogether a new proposition, which the American
Government were at liberty to accept or reject as they
thought proper ?

Lord Palmerston said that the proposition sent out
was founded on that received last year from the American
Grovemment.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

February \%th, 1841.

Sir R. Peel wished to ask the noble lord what the
precise dtate of our relations with the Government of the
United States of America were, in regard to the dispute
relative to the north east boundary. He did not wishj of

* The Report is dated April 18th. It is communicated to the
United States' Government by a despatch dated '' Foreign
Office, 3rd June !" The day after this debate, the London press
announced, as news from Washington, the arrival there of the
printed Report ! — See Parallel case in ^^ Statements regarding
the Sulphur Monopoly."

V-

Appendix,

153

course, * to provoke discussion, or to ask prematurely* for
information.* A report had recently been published, by two
commissioners who had been appointed by the Government
of this country to inquire into the subject relative to the
boundary line between the state of Maine and the province
of New Brunswick, and he wished to know whether, since
that time, any steps had been taken in concert, by the Go-
vernment of the United States and the British Government,
to put an end to that long litigated question.

Viscount Palmebston said the British Government
had, last year, proposed to the Government of the United
States a draft of a convention for the settlement of the
Boundary question, another draft having been proposed
the year previous. That draft was not accepted by the
Government of the United States, but a counter-draft
was returned. The British Government could not agree to
the counter-draft ; but they last year made a proposal to
the Grovomment of the United States upon the subject of
the Boundary, which the United States Government re-
fused to agree to. The United States Government, how-
ever, sent a counter-proposal, but to that proposal the Bri-
tish Government could not consent. He was not prepared
to enter further on the subject. The survey to which the
right hon. gentleman had alluded, was totally independent
of the negociation. In order to save time, and to gain
all the information possible on the geographical part of the
question, the British Government sent out a commission for
exploring the disputed territory. It was not a joint com-
mission between the two Governments, and the statements
-in the report were to be considered as only eof-partef, the
€k>vernment of the United States being in no way bound
by them. The United States Government had also sent
a commission, with a view to obtain information, still he
believed no material progress has yet been made by the
commissioners.

Sir R. Peel was then to understand that the commission

* N.B. — ^Ten years since these negociations commenced,
t The minister declares his own case ex~parte, and that after
saying the commission was sen*, to examine the geography.

154

Appendix,

which had been sent from this country, was sent without
any concert with the Grovernment of the United States, and
that that Government was in no way bound by the report
which had been made. He was to understand that there
had been no joint proceedings between the two govern-
ments—no concert — and in point of fact, that all the mea-
sures which had been proposed by either Government had
been reciprocally rejected ?

Viscount Palmebsto"^-— not exactly (!) rejected. The two
governments had agreed to a form of commission, but not to
all the details by which it was to be carried out. When
Colonel Mudge and Mr. Featherstonhaugh were appointed
commissioners the American Grovernment was informed of
the fact, and those gentlemen had received from that Go-
vernment every facility for obtaining infmnation which
could be given by a friendly state.

Sir R. Feel wished to know whether the United States
Government had agreed to the commission to which the
noble lord alluded P Would the commission proposed have
power to decide the question at issue ; and if it could, had
the Government of the United States agreed to that prin-
ciple P

Viscount Falmerston said the Grovernment of the
United States had first proposed a commission of one cha-
racter and to that commission the British Government had
agreed, but proposed certain modifications in the arrange-
ments. The American Grovernment then proposed a com-
mission of a different character, which connected with it an
arrangement for arbitration in case disputes should arise.
The first commission contained no arrangement for arbi-
tration. The British Government had agreed to that pro-
posal. The Grovernment of the United States, however,
changed their minds, and said, they wished to have a com-
mission coupled with an arrangement for arbitration. He
would not enter upon the points still unsettled, but he
might say that the difference existing between the two go-
vernments was not relative to the principle, but to the mode
in which the commission should be carried out

The conversation here dropped.

..A-»-,

Appejiidix.

155

No. VII.

Negociationa* respecting (he Boundary subsequently to
breaking the Award, as given in Papers marked /. <§• //.

Second series of negociations open 10th January, 1838,
by a declaration from the British to the American Govern-
ment that both governments were as f^ee as before the
reference had been made to the King of Holland.

The United States Government had previously proposed
to that of England a joint commission, to survey the terri-
tory, and a proposition for the appointment of an umpire.

January 10th* 1838. — The British Representative com-
municates the assent of the British Government to the
principle of a joint commission and to the appointment of
an umpire; but proposing that the State of Maine should
be an assenting party to any arrangement.

The American Government replies that it is impracti-
cable to ascertain what are the real views and intentions of
Her Majesty's Goveriiment.

Fifteen months elapse.

April 6th, 1839. — ^A draft of a convention*!* is transmitted
to Washington by Lord Palmerston. In this convention
there is no mention made of an umpire.

May 10th. — It is communicated to the United States
Government and rejected on the 16th by the President.

July 9Qth, 1889.— A counter-draft is sent by the United
States, containing an arrangement for arbitration, with a
letter urging the necessity of the adoption of such measures
as might, " under some form, result in a final settlement.*

July 30M, 1839.— Mr. Fox informs the United States'
Gx>vemment that Commissioners had been sent from
England to survey ihe frontier before the pending nego«
'ciations for the establishment of a new joint commission
could be terminated.

February l^th, 1840. — Lord Palmerston commimicates

* The Report and Correspondence are published in two parts,
marked Part I., Pcirt II. Who would suspect that there werp
other papers relating to the Boundary ? These are marked A and B.

t Referring in the preamble to the proposals made by the
United States in the months of April, May, and June, 1833.

; 'I

1&6

Appendix,

to the United States' Government that Her Majesty's Minis-
ters will send an answer to the last communication of the
American Government when the report of the Commis-
sioners is prepared.

June Shrd, 1840.-~Lord Palmerston gives his consent to
the principles of the United States draft for a convention,
communicated on the 29th of July, 18d9 ; but rejects it on
account of some of the details; promises that an amended draft
will be sent out to the United States by an eaiiy opportunity.

This reply was kept back, on the plea that the report
of the Commissioners was not ready. That report is dated
16th April. The answer, which is not an answer, 3rd
June, 1840.

On the 27th April, 1838, Mr. Fox is invited to a confer-
ence by Mr. Forsyth, Mr. Fox has no powers to neffociate,
but transmits the invitation he receivers to Lord Palmerston.

30th March, 1839. — Mr. Stevenson reproaches Lord
Palmerston for his not having sent instructions, as he had
repeatedly given assurances that he would, to Mr. Fox, con-
veying powers to negociate, and oiTering, on behalf of his
Crovernment, to remove the negociation from Washington
to London.

On the 16th May, 1839> Mr. Fox acknowledges having
received a despatch, 22nd March, giving him powers
to negociate for the arrangement of any dispute between
the two Governments.

3rd Aprily 1839. — Lord Palmerston refuses to remove
the negociations from Washington to London.

\Qth May, 1839. — Mr. Fox transmits to Mr. Forsyth a
draft of a convention, and states that he has powers to sign it,
should it he accepted by the Government of the United States.

9Qth July, 1839.— He receives a counter-draft from Mr.
Forsyth, which he transmits on the 4th August to London,
returning no answer to the United States' Government, and
making no offer to nesociate.

Every session has the Minister expressed his expectation
of an approaching settlement and has the House of
Commons concurred in that expectation, and of course not
being able to see beforehand what was coming, how can
they understand it after it has occurred ?

Appendix.

157

Effect of the Publication of the Report. — Unanimous
Resolution of the Legislature of Massachusetts f^-n^Yiai
the late Report made to the Grovernment of Great Britain,
by their commissioners of survey, Messrs. Featherstonhaugh
and Mudge, though not to be regarded as having yet re-
ceived the sanction of that government, is calculated to
produce, in every part of the United States where it is
examined, a state of the public mind highly unfavourable
to that conciliatory temper, and to that mutual confidence
in the good intentions of each other, without which it is
hopeless to expect a satisfactory result to controversies
between nations.

No. VIII.

See Preface, p. xvi.

Ewtract from " The Crisis.""

While these pages were passing through the press, I
have learned the details of proposals made to France by
Russia in 1830, and which concluded in an arrangement,
by which France was to suffer Russia to add Constantinople
to her dominions, and consented to concur in the measures
which Russia might take to bring about this result.

Russia was not in any manner to proceed by violent
means, but as the Turkish empire was falling to pieces
by itSi'Jf, Russia was only to assist this dissolution, and
in a pacific manner, that is to say, by a succession of
TREATIES. Prussia and Austria were to be brought t^ take
part in this arrangement. Russia was to protect France
agaikist the maritime power of England. The possession
of the Rhenish provinces, Antwerp and Belgium, were
guaranteed to her; Holland was however to keep
Luxembourg; Prussia would be Offered a compensation
in Hanover, and in the whole or in a part of Saxony;
Austria would receive for her share the Turkish provinces
on the Danube.

This negociation was revealed by Prince Polignac him-
self during the revolution of July, to prove that he had
served the interests of France. It is known that certain
dscuments, relative to this transaction, were at the time
charitably thrown in the fire by the distinguished His-

\6B

Appindh:,

lorian of French diplonmcf^ ai he judged that th^ might
have brought Prince PoUgnac to the Mock.

To prepare Ibr the abandonment by the Britiih Cabinet
of the alliance with France, Euwa invited from the pre-
ceding administration, that of M. Mol^ propodtioQa ilmi-
lar to those above detailed. Theie having at length
assuioed a deBuite shapes M. Brunow waa tent to London,
armed with those proofs of the treachery of France. Thus
was liord Palmerston able to do what he has done*.

It would appear, however, that some of the colleagues of
Iiord Palmerston are beginning to be alarmed, and think
of arresting him in his career. But what can they do ?
Dismiss him ? The treaty would remain and would weigli
upon England only a heavier burden in the hands of the
ministo* who would succeed him, in the midst of compli-
cations which he would bv^ unable to unravel or to com-
prehend, and having Lord Palmerston in opposition.

SaVKTY is OHI.V TO BC FOUND IN THB PKOOF THAT THE
BAND WBICB HAS SIQNKD THIS DXXD |S A GUII.TY HAND.

It is the only means which wi4' permit the light of day
to break in on this infamous series of wholesale treason.
The danger would be now immensely increased by the
accession to power of unconscious agents. The system can
be destroyed only in the criminaL— ^page Ift.)

(And what matters the exposure of nich things after^
wards 9 The point is gained, men do not go back to
examine how and why they have come to adopt a dedsion ;
and the very suspicion of deception leads them to use
every means to stifle inquiry)..

*■ The British and Fieaoh imhassadois at St Peteisburgh
have been sltaroataly* treated with marked attentkm by the
JSmpexor, or with marked coldness. On one ocoanon. Lord
Duriiam invited from the Emperor a more oourteoiis demeanour
for the French ambassador. On his retmn to England he used
these wofds : ** My embassy has been important and saccearfal,
if it had had no other result than this, that it has proved to
. Russia that her efforts to break the I^lish and French aIH>
ance were vain *

rRINTKD BY T. UHKtV&bL, RUP|(iT SfRBBT, UAYNAHK.£T» I.0MQ9ir.

tht
kissi
Ifrai

in
ktil

del

exj

its

and

I I

col
iG

ip '.
ha(
ce
ish:

iTEL

UNION OF GREAT BRITAIN AND RUSSIA TO M

Mnnh 4lh, 1841.

REMARKS.

Since tlie last war, the following great inter-
national events have occurred, in all of which Rus-
sia has stood on the one side, acting or prompting,
Enghind on the other, complaining or resisting.

1 . The Holy Alliance.

2. 'I'he occupation of Naples hv Austria.
'i. In\asion of Spain hy France.

4. Insurrection of Cireoce.

.'). Treaty of the 0th .July, 1827, for

the dismemberment of Turkey
(5. War of Russia against Persia.

7. War of Russia against Turkey.

8. War of Russia against Circassia.
0. War of Russia against Poland.

10. Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi offensive
against England.

1. England stood alone without, and opposed
to the Holy Alliance.

2. The Aijstrian occupation of Naples was
prompted by Russia, England alone standing aloof.

3. The invasion of Spain by France was
prompted by Russia, who had recourse even to
menaces. Against this invasion, it was a question
whetlier or not England should interfere by arms.

4. The insurrection of Greece was conducted by
Russia as a conspiracy chiefly alarming to England.

.'). The Treaty of the 6th .July, 1837, England
engaged in avowedly for the purpose of re-
straining Russia.

0. The war of Russia against Persia was a di-
rect assault against England, who was bound by
treaty to protect Persia.

7. The war of Russia against Turkey again
placed England and Russia in direct opposition.

5. So the war against Circnssia.
0. So the war with Poland.

10. Fin;illy, on the revelation of the secret Treaty
imposed by Russia on Turkey, that of Unkiar
Skelessi, England protested against Russia's act.

Thus England stood as the sole opponent, in
Europe as in Asia, at once of the objects which
Russia |)ursued, and of the doctrines which she
laboured to propagate.

Hostility, more grave in its character, gigantic
in its objects, inveterate in its activity (on one
side at least), never was preseni>^d before between
nation and nation.

Such being the reciprocal position of the two
Governments, namely, that of constant aggression
of Russia, of constant resistance on the part of
England, we discover, in the year 1838, by the
publication of these diplomatic documents, that
Jour yeni's before, the two ffoix'rumentfi had scvreth/

(Declaration of the Ambassador oi II, B. M. at i

he Olynthians could mention many Things now, which, liiul tlicy known ii

I'KRSIA.

AFFGHAN-
ISTAN.

1833.

1834.

183.5.

Dofvnsh'o.

Trrnti/ between

Gnat Britain

and Persia

A (J A INST

Jlussia.

Defensive

Treaty between

England and the

Art'ghans —

Invasion by a

Pretender from

the British

Territorv.

Turkey appeals

to England for

Succour, is

compelled by her

to accept Russian

Succour.

Secret Union

of Great

Brittiin with

Russia respecting

Persia.

(.June lOth.)

British Envoy

instructed to

warn Persia

AGAINST Russia.

(July 25th.)

1836.

British Envoy
instructed to
acquiesce in

Persia's assault
on Herat.

(*)

The Indian
Government
opens Commu-
nications with
Cabool formutual
Defence against
Persia and
Russia.

1837.

British Envoy
instructed from

India to
counteract the
Assault upon

Herat.

1838.

England annuls

the Defensive

Treaty between

herself and

Persia because

Persia is united

to Russia.

The AfTghan
Princes informed
by Russia of the
intention of the
British Govern-
ment to set up
the same
Pretender.

The Indian
Government dis-
avows any
Intention of

setting up
a Pretender.

The Indian Go-
vernment invades

Affghanistan !
without Decla- |
ration of War,
and sets up the

Pretender.

TURKEY.

EGYPT.

GREECE.

Revolt of F.gypt
jirepared b)'

Russia, suffered
by England,

brings Russian
Intervention.

Union of Russia
niid England to
dismember Tur-
key of Greece,
through the
appeal of Greece
to Entjland.

Protest of Eng-
land against the
Treaty between
Russia and Tur
key ; the Price
of that Succour.

Majority of the
Royal Regency

expelled from
Greece by Eng-
land on the plea

that they were
Russian.

Submission by
England to exe-
cution ofa Treaty,
declared by
herself to be
ofTensive against
/J,, her.
(*)

Measures adopted

ostensibly by
British Govern-
ment to defend
Turkey against
Russia.

Boast that
England had

overthrown

the Influence

of Russia in

Greece.

Act of Parlia-
ment to separate

l"]ngland from

Russia, that Eng-

1 ud might pay

t.c Loan which

1 ussia refused

\o advunce.

Sacrifice of

those measures.

Union of the

two Courts.

Alteration of a

Treaty, adopted

to defend Turkey

against Russia,

into a means of

convulsing and

diijmembering

Turkey (1).

Pacha of Egypt

warned so as to
be invited to

declare his Inde-
pendence, to

afford the oppor^

tunitj' for the

Treaty of the

l.'ith Julv.

Russia
piodominant.

Vehement
(lissentions

between

England and

Greece.

F.irvi->t nnrns

A TO MAINTAIN THE PEACE OF THE WORLD.

oil ui II, B. M. AT St. Petersburg II — May, 1836.)

1, had tliey known in Time, their State had not perished." Demosthenes.

GREECE.

CIRCASSIA.

nil

Union of Russia
I and Enghmd to
(lisnicmber Tur-
key of Greece,
through the
ai)i)eal of Greece
to Enyland.

Indepen-
dence
: guaranteed
I against
i Russia hv
i Treaty of
Julv 1827.

Majority of the
Royal Regency

expelled from
Greece by Eng-
land on the plea

that they were
Russian.

Boast that
England had

overthrown

the Influence

of Russia in

Greece.

Appealofthe
(^'ircassians

against
Russia ac-
cepted by
the King of
England.

Act of Parlia-
ment to separate

lOngland from

lUissia, that Eng-

! md might pay

li.e Loan which

1 ussia refused
Kn aflvunce.

de-

tor

le
e

Russia
predominant.

Vehement
dissentions

between

England and

Greece.

Sacrifice of

those
measures.

Measvii-es '
adopled l)y ;
the British ;
Government'
to maintain ■

the lude-
I)endenoe of

Circassia. i

rJ2

POLAND.

Submission
to Incor-
poration
by Russia

of a
Kingdom,
the Inde-
pendence
of which is
guaranteed

England.

CRACOW

Infraction
by Russia
of Treaty

with
England,
(Decla-
ration of
the Law-
Officers
of the
Crown
that all
Treaties
between
Russia and

England
have ceased
to be
binding.) ;

HOLLAND

AND

BELGIUM.

SPAIN.

Union

of the
two Courts

Union

of the

two Courts

Russia
privately
counteracts
the proposals
which she
joins with
England
to sign.
Declaration
of the fact
made to the
Conference of
Iiondon by
Holland —
Russia and
Great Britain
continue
united —
England
continues to
pay Interest
on Ru so-
Dutch Loan,
after violation
by Russia of
Treaties.

Union

of the
two Courts.

Quadruple

Treaty (2)

— Assumed

Policy of

Opposition

on the

part of

England to

the Policy

of Russia.

N.B. -Boast

that the

Influence of

Russia

in the

Peninsula

was
overthrown

BRITISH EMPIRE.

NORTH
AME-
RICAN
COLO-
NIES.

THE
UNITED
KINGDOM.

Oppo-
sition
of the
two Courts.

Insur-
rection
openly
patro-
nised by
Russia.

INDIAN
DOMI-
NION.

INDIAN
GOVERNMENT

(4).

Alarmed at designs
of Russia.

Chartists

organised

by Russian

agents.

Russia
fomenting
Dis-
content
within,

and
creating
Hostility
around,

secret and
avowed
Emis-
saries.

Takes preventive

measures to arrest

Russian

Influence.

Negociations
in Aflghanistan
to resist Persia

and Russia.

Makes War
in Central Asia
against Russia's

Influence.

Makes War on

Persia.

Jour yenrs before, the two ffovenimenls had scvretly

EtrvDt opens

KiiHjnised to each other tliat the interest^)nne
two fountiics were the same in Persia, and liad
agreed to concert their policy ! Ne\ertheless, the
opposition between the two countries continues
as helore to tiie eyes of England, of Europe, and
of the East. This secret concert is established in
Persia at a time when a public protest is made by
flngland against Russia in regard to Turkey.
At the time when England publicly protests
against Russia in Turkey, she concurs with Russia
in regard to the destinies of Poland. At the
time that England concurs with Russia regarding
Poland, she sends instructions to counteract
Russia's intrigues in Greece. At the very time
that England is counteracting her intrigues in
Greece, is England paying to her the Russo-
Dutch Loan, under a treaty which the legal au-
thorities of the Crown declare to be no longer
binding. In this same year a Quadruple Treat}'
is framed for the assumed purpose of arresting
the influence of Russia in the Peninsula. In the
same year the Sovereign of England accepts the
appeal of the Circassians against Russia ; and in
the same year, the Indian Government proceeded
to tcJce measures to arre?* her designs ft
i.. .vihc'^ng that portion of the British territory.
Opposition la ohovvn here, and uniou is declared
there ; now the one, now the other, appears secre ,
now patent, till the whole becomes an inextricably
mass of confusion, where no one can see his way,
yet, respecting which, every man is perpetually
expressing opinions. Thus is reason perverled,
and honesty destroyed — a mist is spread over the
senses of the nation, and the mechanism created
for the conduct of public aflairs is converted into
an engine for the destruction of the state.

Could Russia have suffered England to an-
iiounce INION between them, had England been
pursuing objects of her own":' If so, this union
would have given to England Russia's influence,
to be employed against herself. It was f<.>r the
advancement of Russia's ends, therefore, that this
union was proclaimed. The union of England
and Russia to maintain that peace which no one
but Russia threatened, has, in four years, con-
verted Europe into a vast camp of j)eruianent
armaments, and spre.-.d war throughout Asia, from
the Adriatic to the Yellow Sea.

I Persia invading
j Affghanistan,
Local and pondering
Effects. over the
Conquest
of India.

Hostile

Occupation of

Central Asia

by England.

Conse-j

quence]

to 1

Lng-

land.

Persia, the

Defence

of India,

converted into

a Source of

Danger to

India.

England and

Russia changing

places in

Central Asia,

Prostraiion

of the

Ottoman

Empire.

Decay of

Turkey

through union

of England

with her Foe.

Commu-
nications with

Persia —
Foments Insur-

lection in

the other
Provinces of

Turkey.

Annihilation

of internal
Liberties, and

of external
Independence.

Success as
elsewhere of
England in

ruining

England's

Interests and

Power.

Sacrifice of
Interests,

Rights, and

£'..*5i000,000.

Fraudulent
accounts pre-
sented to

Parliament.

Gene- ii
ral

suits.

England successfi l against England by submission to Injustice — b

inflict injustice. Loss of allies, ruin of character, sacrifice of interests (

thereby, of Europe and the world ; gradual development of hatre<

THEREFORE THE UNIOl

f'nhn of
Pkrsia

ir'ith

liugsia

against

England.

The frontiers
of the British
' power brought
' ONE thousand

JULES NEARER

TO Russia.

Natura/,
frontiers

OF India

OVER STEP I' ED.

By England's

act the

Protectorate

OF Russia,

established

over

THE ONLY

ANTAGONIST OF

R( SSIAN

AMHITION !

*'gyi>t

pre[)ared to be
the pretext

of a COALITION

for the
dismember-
ment OF TIIE
Ottoman
Empire.

Greece had

thrown

herself on the

protection of

''Ugland —

England

thr ws

GrE. Et '^

UNDEH Ti'E

FELT OF

Russia.

(*) ( ) Appointments in these years, as Envoy to Persia, and as Secretary of Embassy in Tiirkey ;
of Authors of Works and Essays exposing the errors of the past policy of Great Dritaiii;
proving the danger to Persia and to Turkey of the public policy and the secret nmchinatiuna
of Russia ; proving the hostility of Russia to Great Britain ; and showing that the sole danger
for Persia antl for Turkey, as for England, rested in the control which Russia possessed over the
policy of Great Britain. Both these individuals were apfxiinted out of the ordinary course. They
accepted these situations solely in the belief of the change which they conceivetl they Imd Ixen AniK-
selves the instruments of cfl'ecting in the mind of the British Government.

(No. 1.) The British Government had ostensibly adopted the project of a commercial treaty
with Turkey. This instrument was framed to shield from Russia the internal prosperity <*f
Turkey; also to counteract the designs of the Pacha of Egypt against his Sovereign. This
Treaty, then proposed, was not carried into effect. Two years later it was conclude<l, hut so altered
AS to become, in the hands of Russia, an i.istrument against England and against Turkey.

(No. 2.) By the Quadruple Treaty (a measure projjosed by the British Secretary for Foreign
Affairs), Russia obtained, lirsf, another diplomatic web spreading over these four countries;
Second, Continuation of distraction in the Peninsula; Third, Patronag? of, and influence with,
the t)pposition in England, which resisteti the measures into which she had led the Government ;
/owrZ/j, The occupying of attention— confusion of opinion — the exasperating of faction throughout

NOTES.

the whole of Europe. Having secured all these results, she 1
of a counter loague of Austria and Prussia with nerself ;
fhriMiji^h th** BrJtisii Minister ; placing France in oppositio
vr:,titt'Hm%; putting Austria and Prussia in opposition to I
T» 'iJi has I u rope l^en divided into two hostile leagues. At th
f/t Ut^ '/thei IS Kiiglnnd — the two Powers declaring themselv

(No. 3.) The totual los^ of money in expenditure, sacrifii
of »4 venue in India and Canada, &c., amounts to above »f'.2(),(X
by the arrestatiou of its course abroad and the shaking
ini|Kn«rd a nuu h heavier loss than this. I refer, of course,
in this tahl'S

(No. 4.) I have placed in distinct columns India an
a State convulst^l by Russia ; tlic second, a Government para
fxjssessed over it by England. Had the Indian Governr
appealed to England against Russia ; and had it found Enc
l(K)ked on it also as its foe, and must have ceased to be infl
England, the Governors of India are Englishmen.

VUINTED BY T. BRETTELL, EtTPEUT 8TI

n-
f

Annihilation

of internal
Lil)erties, and

of external
Independence.

Sacrifice of
Interests,

Uights, and

£.3^000,000.

Fraudulent
accounts pre-
sented to

Parliament.

Tliis people
assailed by
Knssia, cut
off from the
rest of mankind
through —

England's

submission to

the piratical

seizure of a

British vessel

on their

Coast.

Incorpo-
rated with
Russia.

Sacrifice of

commercial

Rights.

Sacrifice

commercial

Rights.

kSiicrifice

Money

and

Rights,

Sacrifice

of Blood,

of Treasure,

of Rights,

of Name,

ssion to Injustice — by employment of ships, troops, monoy, and influence, to
, sacrifice of interests (3). — Gradual darkening of the mind of i^Jngland, and,
1 development of hatred between nations, and of passions among men.

Great Britain an object
of

contempt to the powerful-
of
alarm to the weak.

England incomprehensible to

Englishmert, therefore —

Knowledge f»f Public Afliiirs,

Sense of Justice, Artections of

Patriotism, Rights of

Citizenship — destroyed.

liorvrniimit

ucfinfj atjainst

the All}! of

the British

(ioci'i'nment.

Indian

Ciov».'rnment

acting according

to the secret
Intentions of tlie
British Minister,

HOUSE— WHICH AN ENEMY HAS
DIVIDED AGAINST ITSELF.

:)RE THE UNION OF ENGLAND TO RUSSIA HAS PRODUCED

) be
rioN

Greece had

thrown

herself on the

protection of

'-^iiigland —

THR ws
Grekc'J

UNDE't Ti'F
FET/r OF

Russia.

Participation
of Engian<l
in Russia'.s

AC.';r!'.ssivE

WAR AGAINST
CiRCASSIA.

Annexa-
tion TO
RrssiA

OF A
KlNODOiM.

Admission
of the rig'it :
of Russia i

TO DO AS
SHE

PLEASES.

Years of

ALARM

to Europe.
Its press
filled with
millions of
columns of

VAIN
DISCISSION.

Division of

Europe

into TWO

HOSTILE
LEAGUES.

Insurrection in Canada — Sedition in the United
Kingdom — Insurrection in India
— fomented by Russia.

India openly
— menaced by Russia.
Interests and Power of Britain throughout the World

— assailed by Russia,
England and Russia being the while united,]

THROUGH

THE TREASON OF A BRITISH MINISTER.

NOTES.

ed all these results, she further obtains. Fifth, The formation
id Prussia with herself; controlling tlie Quadruple Alliance ,
cing France in opposition to England by the violation of its
•russia in opposition to England, by the fact of its existence. '
two hostile leagues. At the head of the one is Russia, at the head
*ower8 declaring themselves united to ninintain the peace of the j

ney in expenditure, sacrifice of mortgage pecuniary advances, loss I

amounts to above /'.20,000,(X)0; but t!.e dinniiution of commerce, !

)road and the shaking of commercial confidtiire at home, has i
this. I refer, of course, only to the few (O'Jiitries enumerated

stinct columns India and the indian Government. The first |

:ond, a Government paralysed in mind and action by the control |

lad the Indian Government been independent, it would have I

; and had it found England united to Russia, it would have j

it have ceased to be influenced by it. But unfortunately for '

e Englishmen. ;

N.B — Besides the States enumerated in this table, there is scarcely one, great or small, in which
our position is not compromised and endangerecl by aggressions of the native authorities, or by
interference of Foreign States, or by our own injustice. Violaticm of right, sacrifice of money
and of commerce, we have endured in all. National contempt, and political hostility, is preparing
to invite the strong and to compel the weak into enmity against this land — once the palladium of
liberty, and the holder of the scales of power.

On entering the last war, England s naval force wm equal to that of the united naval force of
the world. It now constitutes litUe more than a third. England depends on supremacy at sea
for the maintenance of her colonial dominions- the protection of her coasts and territories, for
the materials for naval architecture, and— for foe:'..

E.vlmcledfrMn "EXPOSITION of TRANSACTIONS in CENTRAL ASIA, through
which the Barriers to the British Possessions in India have been sacrificed to Russia,
bv VISCOUNT PALMERSTON, constituting Grounds for the Impeach-
ment of that Minister. By David Urquhart, Esq,"

BRETTELL, RUPERT STREET, HAYHARKET, LONDON.