IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) /. {./ ^yM:"^ ■y 4, % %^ /- 7a 1.0 I.I 1.25 H: 1^ 12.0 Ml. 2.5 1^ 112.2 1.4 1.6 V] <^ /a / y y^ Photographic Sdences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) S72-4S03 A iV •1>^ :\ \ ^9> V 6^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH 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 bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a dtd possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde v/ Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pelliculde y Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque y Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d6color6es. tachet6es ou piqudes Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Pages detached/ Pages ddtachdes Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) y Showthrough/ Transparence Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Quality of print varies/ Quality in^gale de I'impression Bound with other material/ 1 — 1 Reii6 avec d'autres documents Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel suppldmentaire The to t The pos oft filnr Ori| beg the sioi oth firs sioi or D Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ Lareliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmdes. □ Only edition available/ Seule Mition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmdes d nouveau de fapon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. IZl Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaires: Irregular pagination : [iii]- x, xxi-xxvil, [xl- xx, 23 - 168, [2] p. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. Th« sha TIK wh Ma diff ent beg rig^ req mei 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X y 12X 16X 20X a4x 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: MacOdrum Library Carleton University L'exemplaire fiimd f ut reproduit grdce d ia g6n6ro8it6 de: IVIacOdrum Library Carleton University The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, 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 i!hjstrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont film^s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmds en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -^(meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparattra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, seion le cas: le symbole --^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole 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 filmds d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmd d partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 I 1 t S 4 "5 ■ 6 ■.■■f'^.; CASE OF M'LEOD li TRIED AS AN ACCOMPLICE WITH THE CROWN OF GREAT BRITAIN FOR FELONY. ; " Parliaments alone cannot save, but Parliaments alone may niin, a State." Sir W. Temple. iToutti) iSUitton. Ji;i UY DAVID URQUHART, Esq. LONGMAN AND Co., LONDON; AND COUPLAND AND Co., SOUTHAMPTON. 1841. N.B.- ;ion of tl it is of By itself compreh( LONDON : PRINTED BY J. MITCHELL AND CO, (laTE BRETTELL), nUPERT STREET, HAYMARKET. Preface t Note to 1 Preface t j'f Statemei Correspc Amer of Mr Debate Parallel Interesi Honi Pobtscr N.B.— The case of Mr. M'Leod is subsidiary to the ques- tion of the Boundary Differences. It is a link in a chain ; it is of importance solely in connection with that chain. By itself (as every other diplomatic transaction) it is in- comprehensible, and can only bewilder and confuse. CONTENTS. ■ — ♦ — PAGE Preface to the Second Edition ^^^ Note to the Third Edition «^* Preface to the Fourtli Edition ^^" 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 '^^ PART III. Debate in the House of Commons '^^ PART IV. Parallel Case of Boundary DiflFerences 72 PART V. Interests compromised Abroad, Constitution subverted at Home, by the House of Commons ^2 113 Postscript .' " ' i \ ■ VI CONTENTS. M ■t APPENDIX. No. I. — " The gigantic schemes of r,mb:tion 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. III. — Contemporary Statement of the Case of the Caroline, in a Now 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 Parliament, House of Lords, Feb. 8, 1841 No. 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 from " The Crisis" No. IX. — Debate in the House of Commons, (Jth May, 1841, on the Destruction cf " The Caroline," &c. . . No, X. — Extracts from Correspondence between Mr. Fox and Mr. Webster • . PAf 12, 12 1 12^ 131 is: 151 155 157 159 164 alod by • . . 121 to the * • • 1 z of the 'ier and . . . 121 to the f of the • . . 13lj Lords, I . . 137 imons, . . 15] ' sub- Papers . . 155 . . 157: May, . . 159 .Fox . 164 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. The seizure of 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 becii 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, ])y the examination of other facts, having been shown to be the instrument of that vlii PRtl'ACL TO power. It is then inferred that the object, with a view to which the United States' Government was inveigled into this position, was to furnish the British Minister with the opportunity of (hiving 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 the conse- (lueiices 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 tiie 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 declaration was in print, was it made TITR SKCOND FDrTION. ix known that the British Government luid taken a decided line — had determined to enforce the liberation of Mr. M^Lood 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. 1 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 warj 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 — cquii)ping and building of ships — augmentation of troops; and this load of military prcp.arations, 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, that for ten years has tortured the world. B PREFACE TO Tntelliwncc of a final scttloment 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 aflairs 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 afTairs. To France (from whom a recent Quadrui)le Treaty was withheld) Ihe En(/lish GovevmnciU com- municaled first (so at least the public press infoims us), its intention of rcquirinij imperatively from the United States the liberation of Mr. 3PLeo(l, nith- out trial, and of sendtny a sqn((dron to enforce that demand, A few days afterwards the Paris papers k •A THR Til nil) F.DITION. XXI Parliament and nation, whicli had demanded and suggested nothing; and which has, indeed, ah'eady forgotten that such a person as Mr. M'^Leod is in existence, and awaits for the interest of excitement that may he afforded it by some more novel incident of degradation and dishonour. There is no escape from the dilemma in which your Minister has placed you, save in the surrender of Mr. M'^Leod. This if withheld could be ob- tained only by evincing the determination of Eng- land to enforce it. Instead of this, the British Minister puts the t7vo 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 on' 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. ^ PKEFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. Since the publication of the Third Edition of these pages, which are now reprinted without any alteration, intelligence of the trial and acquittal of Mr. M'^Leod has reached this country. The life of a British subject, imprisoned under the charge of obedience to the delegated authority of the Crown, is no longer at stake ; but the question, in its gravest aspect, in its national import and teeming future remains unaltered. The seizure, — permitted reten- tion, and trial of a British subject has taken place ; and through this a permanent change in the charac- ter, position, interests, rights of Britons and of Britain — unless, that which has been in this case invited, submitted to, and sanctioned, be now re- pudiated. Against the effects of this and similarly-concocted betrayals it will ere long be too late to protest, and vain to struggle. To the responsibility which the leaders of the Conservative Party have already incurred, as mem- bers of the opposition, they will have accepted, now a second and more direct responsibility ; and unless they repudiate the past, they will soon have to reap a harvest of the dragons' teeth that have been sown for them. The United States having assumed, and asserted to England the destruction of the Caroline to be an ortence against its sovereignty, was warranted, while Great Britain withheld a reply (which was tanta- mount to concurrence), in seizing and hanging any PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. XXIll *; f)f the parties to that act, or indeed any British citizen. Mr. M'^Leod is arrested — the British ..Envoy can only plead his case. The United States, emboldened by this concur- rence, and encouraged by the facility and success which attended each new assumption as every past encroachment*, contended next for an independent jurisdiction for the State of New Yorkf! thus claiming in the abdication of its authority, a power of placing each state of the federation above all law, recognised between nations. These are direct consequences of the non-recog- nition of the destruction of the Caroline. But it may be said that it was impossible to foresee the seizure of anv of the actors in that scene, and that therefore Lord Palmerston had not thought it worth while to reply to the demand of the United States. But we find that this contingence was not only foreseen, but publicly announced — steps having been taken for that purpose in the law courts of the State of New York ! How, then, could the British Minister escape from dealing with the question ? The prevention of such an occurrence was the easiest of things while the most imperative of duties,— a reply settled the matter. Instructions, on the anticipation of such an event, were sent, but they were — to remon- strate ; instructions kept concealed from the United * See also Boundary Question. t It will be seen by reference to tho Parliamentary papers relative to the Boundary disturbances in 1827 and 1820, a pas- sage from which I have quoted in my analysis of the papers relative to the Boundary Question, that Lord Palmerston was the first to suggest this separate jurisdiction. XXIV PREFACE TO States Government for eighteen months, till after the arrest of a British subject — instructions inopera- tive when produced as withholding all reply to the demand of the United States ! Putting aside, then, his motives and intentions, Lord Palmerston is responsible for the event that has occurred, and such responsibility is impeach- ment. A decision, or reply, relative to the Caroline, was withheld by the British minister till the United States were fully committed. When the British Government does avow the destruction of the Caroline — that avowal comes to consummate the degradation of the crown in exhi- biting it struggling in vain to obtain the liberation of one of its servants, imprisoned and tried for an act avowed as its own ! And upon what plea has this course of action been justified by the United States, and submitted to by Great Britain ? This — that the State of New York has its independent jurisdiction ! It is repulsive even to the most ordinary common sense that such a question could, for a moment, be matter of discussion, as it would have been held an insult to the meanest capacity, if put a priori ; and yet such is the ability of these so-called civilized nations, that argument and reasoning on this fatuity has constituted the sum of public discussion on this momentous question ; which has closed, as far as England and her press is concerned, by the expression of their confidence that the enlightened policy of the United States would lead them " to " alter their constilution /" The Conservative Government are brought in to THE FOURTH EDITION. XXV be committed to this act, as by coming in, in 1834, they were to the setting aside of the award of the King of Holland, and also to bear the shock of the disasters about to burst on this land. On the 6th May (subsequently to the publication of the third edition), Mr. Hume moved for the production of papers; the motion was opposed by Lord John Russell, to whom, on that occasion, Lord Palmerston confided the task of bewildering the House. In declining, on the usual pretext, to produce the papers moved for, Lord John Russell, while he purports to state " jjrecisely how the matter stood,'' mentions the fact of " complaint" having been made, but not that redress was, at the same time, required, as subsequently in the same evening he was drawn out to acknowledge. It will likewise be seen by Lord John's remarks, that England was still allowed to leave the matter as assumed by the United States, as the act of " individuals." Again, it was not the " acts,'' but one act, the destruction of the Caroline, which was in question, and which could not be left in doubt a single hour. It will thus be seen, that up to the very time Lord John Russell spoke, his own words prove the United States were not authorised to lOok on it as an act of the British Government, but could only view it as the act of " certain individuals and officers of Upper Canada." Neither was there any " discussion" between the two Governments; there was complaint and de- mand for redress on the one hand, — no reply on the other, — but what was worse, an admission of statements and counter-statements by subordinate XXVI PREFACE TO Hi authorities, without first establishing the character of the transaction itself. The United States Govern- ment did not, says Lord John Russell, press for an answer. The question was, why did the British niinister not give an answer? These words prove that the answer had not been given ; the inquiry had resulted from this silence; for if there is no reason advanced, or excuse set up, the mere state- ment that the opposite party had not pressed you to do your own duty is offered and accepted^ as justification for the neglect of that duty ! and this by 650 gentlemen, charged by delegation and on oath, to watch over the public interests. Lord John Russell concludes by stating, that, but for the arrest of Mr. M*=Leod the matter would have been allowed to drop 1 Sir R. Peel asks, " whether the law could he " allowed to take its course ?'* and this in such a case AS THAT which has been unfolded in these pages. What knows such a man of international rights and public law ? Again, Sir Robert Peel steps forward as the pro- tector of the Government from the questions put by Mr. Duncombe, — questions which, had they emanated from the leader of a powerful opposition, as the country had a right to expect, would have saved us from this and the like disgrace, danger, and crime. The further diplomatic correspondence which has appeared, places most clearly the dilemma for the United States. The British Minister, through the channel of Mr. Fox, reiterates the demand for the release of Mr. M'^Leod, on the grounds that he was arrested and put upon his trial on account of tran- I I THE FOURTH EDITION. XXVll i.1 i( a (C it sactions of a public character, planned and executed by persons duly empowered by Her Majesty's Co- lonial Authorities, &c. He then goes on to say, that " the transaction in question may have been a justifiable employment of force, as is the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, or it might have been a most unjustifiable violation of " the territories of the United States, as was the " opinion of the Government of the United States." " But this," says Lord Palmerston, " is a question purely of an international kind, which can be discussed and settled only between the two Go- '' vernments." This is the subject which he had avoided to discuss, and by avoiding to discuss which, he justified the United States in considering as an '* unjust violation of their territory" — gav^ them thereby the right of trying, not only the par- ties concerned as if it were a question of individual crime, but any individual subject of the British Crown, whom they might think fit to seize. The law respecting reprisals must equally apply respect- ing crimes, although the world has never yet pre- sented the circumstances in which such an applica- tion had been made. Mr. Webster, in his reply, labours to bring the British Minister to see that, by not establishing the case of the British Government as against the United States, they compelled the United States into a position of aggression against Great Britain. In the Appendix will be found the most important passages in the two letters*. * See Appendix, No. X. PART 1. STATEMENT OF THE CASE OF MR. M*^LEOD*. " To neglegt those things to which your lives and fortunes should be devoted, is most reprehensible ; yet you never attend but on occasions like this, when danger is actually present." Demosthenes. 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 t'ne present to exhibit lawless phrenzy putting on the forms 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. I : 1 TUFC SIICONI) EDITION. xi 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 verv 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, befoie his nation, in the most extraordinary and jibsolute 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 ?. M^ith England^ and ONLY WITH England. * * 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- Xll PREFACE TO At the period of M. Tliicrs'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 Kngland. 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.' " Delate^ lOth 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 tribimals, and, in this course of iniquity, it is supported by the Minister of England. The Russian 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 ]>arlia- ment of England, whom he appears to represent, and whom he moulds to his will. Thus does England render triumphant hor enemies in the French councils. Thus does she conlirm Franco in a course of liostility to England. Thus does she render THE SFCONI) EDl'llON. XUt iiiidorstood, 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 t)cca- 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 ignorant 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 tbo enemy of itself. Therefore, those who have been the friends of England must now become her bitterest foes becansc betrayed, and her foes become possessed of her senseless pcojjle's unsus- pecting confidence." — Conversation Sth February^ 1840. Diplo- macy and Commerce. * " ]M. Thiers was excluded from office, because he had de- clared alliance with England, the chief end of the foreign jiolicy of France." He has since come into office, and has been expelled by Enfjland. XIV IKE FACE Tl) 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, tiie thing was done ; no sooner was it done, than they all commended it. The means by 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*. Tlie 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 Pahnerston, 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 arc 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 (>f the British people, while actually engaged in abandoning the Turkish capital to Rubsitm protection ?" &c. — The Sun, April 2\. ■^^ THE SECOND EDITION. XV I Kit VP itself to be free, and these arc successful by secrecy alone. Thus a free people is governed with a secrecy, unknown to the most despotic states. The day l)efore the Treaty of the IDtli .Tuly 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 15th of July : — France under a minister who was a partisan of * AVhen it was first asserted that this Treaty did exist, the leading journal of the day said that England would arise like a single man, and tear it like a mesh of rushes. Two days after- wards, it was advocating the Treaty. XVI I'll i:f Act lo Russia, had made to Russia propositions for u project of common partition to the 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 loth 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 secrecv, and thus it reaches far. Throuidi 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. ■ii if -K', i; 1 al v Sd 1 SI bt '[ u >\ 8 a^ I P ti 1 in * See "• Tiio Crisis," an oxtruct from which will bu found in tho Appendix, N(... VIII, rili: SlUONI) KDITION. X\ II III tlie prescnl instance like means may be adopted, if indeed, by success in regard to the Treaty of the ir)tli July, ill lulling suspicion, and in coniniitting all men to his acts, he is not placed in a position so commanding a» 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 ; for the accuracy of the state- ments I cannot vouch, » March 24/A. " 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 Palnierston 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 inmiediately acceded to, Mr Fox returns home ! " Lord Palmerston would thus be again strengthened by this exhibition of his watchfulness, of Iiis 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 PKKFACE TO I'lIE SECOND EDITION. (huils-:-iiay, say to one indhidmd ; 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. /I XIX Note to the Third Edition. April 23rd, Again another month has elapsed, and the servant ol" 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 ; 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 Aj)pendix, page 150. • XX NOTK 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 Britisli 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 tono of public feeling in the United States may Lo appreciated from the following extract from the press of that country. " The Progress 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 coneequcnces, and the terrible power with which we shall have to struggle. lict those too who most cry " war," be pinned by solemn bond to serve in sucli a war. Let the frontier too know, that, in all probability, from Detroit to Burlington, not a town nor vilhige near the line would escapC) 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 L^nitcd States is, therefore, a suicide, as well as a fratricide. We have no i)atiencc with the unnatural oiFsjiring of a connnon origin that cry for it. The diflicult questions we have to settle, must be adjusted with tlio forbearance and kindness of, as it were household disputes. If England be ambitious for wrongful power, it must be souf^ht for among the Barbarians of Asia, or in the Islands of the ocean — not here, among its offspring, who have inherited its valour, and learnt its lessona of wrong and right." — New York Wecklj/ Statement of the Case of Mr. M'Leod. 23 republic of Anglo-Saxons, that by some strange revolution in human affairs, 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 ? Or, is it within the British empire itself that the project has l)een 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 British 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 Government 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 chief 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 24 Statement of the Case proceedings against individuals connected vfith 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 justify 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 the 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, is 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 affoid 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. ofMi\ M'Leod. 25 The Government of the United Slates had judged the men occupying Navy Island to be outlaws. No American citizen could, therefore, be guilty of murder in killing these men, nor guilty of arson 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 destruction of law, not for the dispensation of justice — for the perpe- tration of piracy, not for the protection of men. This 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, during three years, a charge of felony ! This, indeed, is incomprehensible, and must arouse the most vehement indignation or the most alarming suspicions. The demand of the United States was for repa- ration for the violation of the neutrality of its territory. c 20 Statement of the Case If the neutrality of its 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, over 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, bij not making a demand jir reparation for the aggressions proceeding from the United States, left the character of the seizure of the vessel o/Mr.M'Lcod. 27 open to discussion : by submitting in silence to THE DEMAND FOR REPARATION fioni America, she gave her pragmatic consent to the assertion, made by the Government of the United States, that that act was 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 Britain the charge of arson and of murder — admitted : here was a step of the United States Government, 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 thai was able, and could not then detect or pumsh ont^ that was criminal. What would be said of leaving a simple dispatch for three years un replied to ? But in such a matter, with such consequences impending, such interests involved, 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- 28 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, sul)verted." — Demosthenes. of Mr, M'Leod. 29 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 ' eir 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 to 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 these events 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 republicans * See Appendix, No. I. 30 Stalcmcnl of ihc 'Cnso. Tor the UukI of their lathers' graves ; heecUess unci iiulillereiit were they to all questions of European policy. This lias 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- t)rehended them, and thereby to be drawn within the vortex in which the Cabinet of 8t. Petersburg!! sweeps round thoughts, fortune, and events*. * At the present' moment that throughout Europe, Asia, and America, Russia is no h)nger predominant merely in repressing resistance, but predominant in the command of the j.ctive 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 througliout 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 powerful than we are : with a slender portion of her strength, the materials for instance contained in two or three line-of-battle- ships, we could defy the power of Russia, and yet Turkey sinks of Mr. M'Le^ 31 before Russia, and wo stand erect. We tie, ther ^ ire, warned by this, and we say to ourselves, ' bettei it perli )8 to p^ nig- gle as wo struggle, than to have a government througli > h Russia could attack us, not as now with arms that we m but as with a disease for which there is no cure.' " That disease is now in the heart of every man belonging to the Gothic race. 32 PART II. CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE HRIT18H ENVOY AND THE AMERICAN SECRETARY OF STATE, RELATIVE TO THE SEIZURE OF MR. M'^LEOD. (( I hope, Sir, when those papers arc produced, that their contents will not bo 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." — Lord Palmerston, February bthy 1830. On the seizure of Mr. MXeod, the British En- voy at Washington acts upon the instructions pre- viously sent. Mr. Fox remonstrates, but his remonstrance 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, ^v. 88 ceiviiig 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 ? 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 '^ery 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 \i 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 deloy that invites the American Government to aggression, justifies the Foreign Secretary to his nation in subsequent measures a^\u;ist the American Government. The Foreign Secretary will be justified in his subsequent violence — by his first moderation. 31 Com'Sjondcnce hcftrecn the Brilish Envoy In the words of Lord Palmerston, pronounced through the moutli 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 tlmt design in time to prevent its accomplishment. Sucli 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 vvhen 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 vvhich 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 inquijy in which we are engaged, does not reside in the knowledge of our present position with America, but in this, that it affords some cine to understand the Foreign Minister of England. That vvhich 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. (tnd the Atneiican Scvietdnj 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 '^ii 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. 36 Correspondence between the British Envoy He continues : — *' It is well-known that the de- *' struction of the steam-boat Caroline was a public " act of persons in 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 America, 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 ambiguous 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 govcrimient." n n a a i( a t( (t (I and the American Secretary of State. 37 be r.s 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 of her servants, in the foresight of her Government ? * See Portfolio, Vol. I., Despatch of Prince Lieveii to Count Nesselrode, 1st June, 1829, where another " hear, hear," of the House of Commons, is quoted in triumph and exultation. 02 Debate in the House of Commons. If disasters befall her, or disgrace overwhelm her, it is surely not because she had been deficient in ac- tivity, 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 Palmerston 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, why, in anticipating this case, he had not sent such instructions as were fitting, kc. He holds up to them the doubt of the recognition of the destruction of the Caroline ; and at this target are aimed the shafts of his nervertheless 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 ventures to doubt, or who dares to gainsay ; and another sound issuitig from Debate in the House of Commons. 63 I 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 effect 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 (kiticially 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- tisli 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 * The two debates did reach America together. This docs not alter the fact, that on the night of the 9th it was not anticipated that the morning papers of the 10th woukl be in time for the steamer. 64 Debate in the House of Commons. House of Commons was perfectly satisfied vvitli 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 allovved the charge of arson and murder to hang over the Crown of Great Britain — and there was not 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 tlie 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 Member found in the House to understand the meaning of that Instruction, or to express one word of reproach or of indignation : — That the 0. 7 w Photejgraphic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 iV iV :1>^ :\ \ ^ as a ahilit'if ircum- cap- 1 that ch we. No. IV. tC Papers presented to Co7igress relative to the Arrest of Mr. M'^Leod, on account of the Burning of the Steamer, " Caroline:' MR. FOX to MR. FORSYTH. Washington, Dee. 13, 1840. Sir, — I am informed by his 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 the piratical steam-boat Caroline, in the month of December 1837. After a tedious and vexatious examination, Mr. M'^Leod Avas 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 eft'ectual 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 the order of their superior authorities. That act, therefore, according to the usages of nations, can only he the subject of discussion hetweeji 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 permitted by the authorities of the state of New York to infest the Canadian fronlier. 132 Append i.r. The (jiicstion, however, of wliether Mr. M'^Leod was or was not concerned in tlie destruction of the Caroline, is beside the ])ur})ose of the present communication. That act was the public act of persons obeyin^r the constituted au- tiiorities of Her Majesty's province. The National 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, / helleiie^ 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 will see 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 IStli ult. ; that, after the examination of witnesses, he was finally committed for <^rial on the 18th, and placed in con- finement 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 degree of excitement and in- dignation within the British frontier, 1 earnestly hope that it may be in your power to give me an early and satisfactory answer to the present representation. 1 avail myself of this occasion to renew to you the assurance of my distinguished consideration. Hon. John Fousyth, &c. 11. S. Fox. i MU. FOllSYTH TO MK. FOX. Department of State, Waalibigfoii, Dec. 26, 1840. Sir, — I have the honour to acknowledge, and have laid before the President, your letter of the 13th inst., touching the arrest and imprisonment of Alexander M'^Lcod, 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 destruction of the steam-boat Caroline, in the month of December 1837 ; Appendix. 133 cl was or roline, is That act uted au- Govern- I upon to he Presi- 'ernment iscussion 1 States'* xpecting tice and jlease of may be subjects tates in ^e 12th he was in con- i, whicli is na- md in- )e that factory 3U the ^*'ox. 1840. e laid chiiiiT 'od, a a dis- arson, on of 837; in respect to whicli you 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 grounds 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 country and England. Of the reality of this disposi- tion, 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 then with unfeigned regret that the President finds himself unable to recognise the validity of a tlemand, a com])liance with which you deem so material to the preservation of the good un- derstanding which has hitherto been manifested between the two countries. The jurisdiction of the several states which constitute the union is, within its ajapropriate sphere, perfectly inde- pendent of the Federal Government. The offence with whicli Mr. M^IiCod 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 not, therefore, present an occasion where, under the constitution and laws of the union, the interposition called for woidd be proper, or for which a warrant can be found 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, justify the exertion of such a power, if it existed. The transaction out of which the cjuestion arises, presents the case of a most unjustifiable invasion, in time of peaces of a portion of the territory of the United States, by a band of armed men from the adjacent territory of Canada, tlie 134 Appcndt.v. forcible capture by them within our own waters, and tlie subsequent destruction of a steam-boat, tlie 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, whicli entitles such offenders to impunity before the legal tribu- nals, when coming voluntarily within their independent and undoubted jurisdiction, 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 satisfaction, are independent of each other, and may be separately and simultaneously pursued. Tlie avowal or justification of the outrage by the British authc- rities might be a ground of complaint with the Government of the United States, distinct from the viclation of the ter- ritory and laws of the state of New York. The application of the government of the union 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 offence at the time it was committed, as not material to the decision of the present question. That is a matter to be aecided by legal evidence; and the sincere desire of the President is, that it may be satisfactorily established. If the destruction of the Caroline zvas 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 of the United States by a person authorised to make the admission, and it will be for the Appendlr. 135 IkI the jy of a |i' more enders by the |1 edged quent in the nciple which tribu- nt and !nce to )ecome \o o'o- osecii- overn- r, and The authc- nment he ter- cation ritain, 3, dig- ve the ating, )perty arded >f the to the to be »f tile • If rsons supe- tuni- ^rson I" the I court, which has taken cognisance of the offence with which 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 tlie 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 the 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 naturally 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 Forsyth. Mil. fox to MR. FORSYTH. Washington, Dec, 29, 1840. Sir, — I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 26tli 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 in the destructioyi of the piratical steam-boat Caroline on the 9Qth of December, 1837. I learn with deep regret that such is the decision of the President of the United States, for I cannot but foresee the very grave 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- vernment in England the correspondence that has taken place, and shall await the further orders of Her Majesty's 130 Api ucndix Government with respect to tlic important question which tliat correspondence involves. But I feel it my duty not to close this comnnmication 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^>*6'^ 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 more strict and accurate e.vamination 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 one, in the strictest sense of self-defence, rendered absolutely necessary by the circumstances of the occasion, for the safety and protection of Her Majesty's sub- jects, and justified by the same motives and principles wliich, 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, hiretl from her owners for that express purpose, and known to be so beyond tlie 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 proj^cr authority over that portion of territory. The authorities of New York had not even been able to prevent tlie 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 M;ijesty\s Govern- ment in England. I am not authorised to pronounce the Apprmlir. 1.57 which cation rise at I, with le. I visions (lid of 'rated more icli an lead 1 witl) •essed, :'fcnce, of the 's sub- K'iples /e go- Jnited igagcd from be so nonn- ower ; over- lority New jf the ' used 5. It I will ■ Her been vein- ^ the decision of Her Majesty ""s Government 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 misa{)prehension, as 1 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. MR. FORSYTH TO MR. FOX. Department of State, Washington, Dec. 31, 1840. Sir, — I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 23rd inst., in reply to mine of the 26th, 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. Full 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 proper, 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 facts 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. No. V. DISCUSSION IN PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS. . Feb. 8th, 1841. Lord MouNTCASHEL having put some questions rela- tive to Mr. M^'Leod, K las Appinidir. 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-lx)at Caroline. Immediately on hearing of the chavge made against this individual, Mr. Fox, our minister a'- Washing- ton, had demanded his liberation from the general Govern- ment. He had received a reply, stating that the matter entirely rested with tlie 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 Majesty'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 lie 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 Sth,18^\. 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 particularly that which had been transmitted on the 29th of December last, announcing the apprehension of Mr. M^'Leod. He (Lord Stanley) Aj)j)f'n Apjh'nd'i.r. report was not yet ready*^ and lie 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 extenso ? 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 I^ord Pahnerston again rose, and said that he thougiit it might be satisfac- tory to the House to know that Her Majt ty's Govern- ment had sent out a proposition in answer to one whi(rh had proceeded from the United States, and which had reached this country in the course of last year. The proposition thus transmitted was accompanieu by the draft of a Con- vention, which he had no doubt would have the effect of bringing the whale questio?i to a final and satisfactory issue. Sir R. Peel inquired if the terms of the proposition to which the noble 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 hberty to accept or reject as they thought proper .? Lord Palmeiiston said that the proposition sent out was founded on that received last year from the American Government. HOUSE OF COMMONS. February 19^A, 184L Sir R. Peel wished to ask the noble lord what the precise state 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 wish, of * The Report is dated April 18th. It is communicated to the United States' Government by a despatch dated " Foreign Office, 3rd Jime !" 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." hat the time as ') ? The een sent fed. subject :)n again satisfac- jrovern- hioh had reached oj)osition f a Con- the effect isfactory )sition to any other States, or American L as they sent out American , 1841. what the int of the e dispute t wish, of ited to the " Foreign ndon press lere of the regarding Apinndlv. 1 :>:$ course, * to provoke discussion, or to ask prematurely* for information/ A report had recently been published, by two connnissioners 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 j)rovince 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 St.atcs and the British Government, to put an end to that long litigated question. Viscount Palmers ION said the British Government bad, last year, proposed to the Governn>ent 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 Government 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 ordkr 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 ev-parte'f, the Government 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. PsEL was then to understand that the commission * N.B. — Ton years since these negociations commenced, t The minister declares his own case ex-j)arle^ and that after saying the commission was sent to examine the frcograpby. L 1 54 Appcniliv. which had hi'on sent from this country, was sent without any concert with the Government of the United States, and that that Government was in no way bound by the report which had !)een made. He was to understand that there had been no joint proceedinfj^s between the two govern- ments — no concert — and in point of fact, that all the mea- sures which had been j)roposed by either Government had been recij)rocally rejected ? Viscount Palm kuston — not exactly (!) rejected. The two governments liad 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 connnissioners tlie American Government was informed of the fact, and those gentlemen had received from that Go- vernment every facility for obtaining information which could be given by a friendly state. Sir R. Pkel wished to know whether the United States Government had agreed to tlie commission to which the noble lord alluded ? 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 ? Viscount Palmerston said the Government of the United States had first proposed a commission of one cha- racter and to that commission the British Government had agreed, but projjosed certain modifications in the arrange- ments The American Government 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 Government 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 wiiich the commission should be carried out. The conversation here dropped. .\l)j/i ndi.i . l.V) Ithout S and •c'port there hvcni- t 11 K'U- it had ■? I I s I ! No. VII. Negov'iat'ion.s'^ respecting the Boundary suLseqncnfJy tn hrviiking the Award, as given in Papers marked I. t^ //. Second series of nej^ociations open 10th .Faiuiary, 1S3H, hy a declaration from the liritish to the American Govern- ment that both governments were as free as before the reference had been made to the Kin^ 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 lOM, 18B8. — The British Representative com- municates the assent of the British Government to the princi})le of a joint commission and to the a})pointment of an umpire; but proposing that the State of M iinc should be an ASSENTING party to any ahrangkment. The American Government replies that it is impracJ- cable to ascertain what are the real views and intentions of Her Majesty's Government. Fifteen months elapse. April Gth, 1839. — A draft of a convention-f- is transniitt* d to Washington by Lord Palmerston. In this convention there is ?io mention made of an umpire. May \Oth. — It is communicated to the United States Government and rejected on the 15th by the President. July 29th, 1839. — 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 fi-al settlement.'" July SOth, 1839.— Mr. Fox informs tlr t-nited States' Government that Commissioners had been sent from England to survey the frontier before the pending nego- ciations for the establishment of a liew joint commission could be terminated. February I9th, 1840. — Lord Palmerston communicates * Tho Report and Correspondence are published in two parts, marked Part I., Part II. Who would suspect that there were other papers relating to the Boundary ? These are marked A and f i. t Referring in the prcaiuhle to the projjosals made hy tlie United States in the months of April, May, and June, 1833. 156 Appcndir. .to tlie 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 3rd, 1840. — Lord Palmerston gives his consent to the principles of the United States draft for a convention, communicated on the ^9th of July, 1839 ; 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 early opportunity. This reply was kept back, on the plea that the report of the Connnissioners was not ready. That report is dated 16th April. The answer, which is not an anawer, 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 ne^'ociate, but transmits the invitation he receives to Lord Palmerston. SOth 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 offering, on behalf of his Government, 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. Srd April, 1839. — Lord Palmerston refuses to remove the negociations from Washington to I^ondon. \Gth May, 1839. — Mr. Fox transmits to Mr. Forsyth a draft of a convention, and states that he has powers to sign it, should it be accepted by the Government of the United States. 2dth 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 negociate. 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 bi'iiig able to see beforel^and what was coming, how can tiiey understand it after it has occurred ? Vlinis- [)f the mtnis- cnt to ntion, s it on 1 draft unity. report I dated jr, 3rd confer- 'ociate, erston. Lord he had Dx, con- ■ of his bington having powers jetween remove rsyth a I sign it, 1 States, oni Mr. ^ondon, ^nt, and ectation 3use of iirse not low can Appendix. 157 Effect of the Publication of the Report. — Unanimous Resolution of the Legislature of Massachusetts, — That the late Report made to the Government 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, io 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 vdiich 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 itself 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 to take part in this arrangement. Russia was to protect France against 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 protw that he had served the interests of France. It is known that certain documents, relative to this transaction, were at the time charitably thrown in the lire by the distinguished his- 158 Append i. I'. torian of Frcncli diplomacy, as he judged that tliey might have brouglit Prince Polignac to the block. To prepare for the abandonment by the British Cabinet of the alliance with France, Russia invited from the pre- ceding administration, that of M. Mole, propositions simi- lar to those above detailed. These having at length assumed a definite shape, M. Brunow was sent ^o London, armed with those proofs of the treachery of France. Thus was Lord Palmerston able to do what he has done*. It would appear, however, that some of the colleagues of Lord 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 weigh upon England (mly a heavier burden in the hands of the minister who would succeed him, in the midst of compli- cations which he would be unable to unravel or to com- ])rehend, and having Lord Palmerston in opposition. Safety is only to be found in the proof that the hand which has signed this deed is a guilty hand. It is the only means which will 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 72.) (And what matters the exposure of such things after- wards ? The point is gained, men do not go back to examine how and why they have come to atlopt a decision ; and the very suspicion of deception leads them to use every means to stifle inquiry). * The British and French ambassadors at St. Peteisbiirgh have been alternatoly treated with marked attention by the l']niperor, or with marked coldness. On ono occasion, Lord Durham invited from the Emperor a more courteous demeanour for the French aud)assador. On his return to England he used these words : " My embassy has been important and successful, if it had hatl no other result than this, that it has proved to Russia that her <'tforts to break tlie English and French alli- ance were vain." \ ... .. ..>• *i:. • ' * . nv. ,,^ Apj)i'ni!i.v. 159 Imigbt ibinet le pre- simi- length )ndon, Thus ues of think ?y do? weigh of the conipli- to com- >osition. AT THE r HAND. of day treason. by the tern can ;s after- hack to fecision ; I to use lejsbiirgh by the m, Lord jiueaiiour I he uslmI ucccssful. I roved to !uch alii- 11 « • No. IX. From the " Timea'''' of May Itk, 1841. DESTRUCTION OF THE CAROLINE. Mr. Hume moved for a copy of the correspondence be- tween the Legation of the United States in London and the Secretary of State for the Foreign Department in relation to the destruction of the steam-boat Caroline ; also a copy of the correspondence between Mr. Fox, the British Minister at Washington, and the Secretary of the United States, in relation to the destruction of the steam-boat Caroline : also a copy of the correspondence between the Lieutenant- Governors of Upper Canada and the Governor-General of the Canadas, and the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in relation to the desuuction of the steam-boat Caroline. He would not enter into the merits of the question, but he cer- tainly was of opinion that the correspondence which had been publicly laid before Congress ought to be likewise be- fore that House, and that if it had been ])roduced at an earlier period, it would have tended to prevent much of the excitement which prevailed on both siiles of the Atlantic. Lord J. Russell said, that motions relating to matters still in course of negociation with foreign governments were so entirely unusual, and so much inconvenience to the pub- lic service would attend the production of the correspondence now moved for, that he was sure the House would not sup- port the hon. member for Kilkenny, who, in fact, required the production of the most confidential porticm of the corres- pondence between the Governors of Upper and Lower Ca- nada and the Secretary of State. He did not think the hon, meinber was precisely aware how the matter stood. The Government of the United States had made a complaint of the conduct of certain individuals and officers belonging to Upper Canada, who were said to have taken a part in the destruction of the steam-boat Caroline. The result of that complaint was the transmission of a great quantity of correspondence, and various statements made by the Go- vernor of Upper Canada and several iiulividuals who were 160 Appendiv. t'oncernod in tlio transaction. The American Government sent counter-statements, 6w^ they did not persist in asking for a jinnl answer to their demand ; the effect of ivhich rms, that the acts of the British Government ceased to he matter of discussion between the two Governments. It was not for the British Government to follow up these negocia- tions by saying to the American Government that they must desist from their former demands ; or for the United States to say that they had been in the wrong in making such de- mand. All that could be expected was, that the United States Government should have allowed the subject to drop ; and he was convinced that it would have dropped, and no longer have been discussed between the two Governments, had it not been for the unfortunate arrest of Mr. M^Leod, which completely revived it and the discussions regarding it. Witli regard to the correspondence now moved for, he could only say that the production of it would be inconve- nient to the public service, would tend to embarrass the negociations which were now going on between the two countries in a most amicable spirit, and miglit have the efl'ect of weakening the relations of two mighty and intel- ligent nations. (Hear hear.) Mr. HuMK said, that if the papers he moved for were laid npim the table, they would prove the reverse of what the noble lord the Secretary ffr the Foreign Depart- ment had stated. That noble lord had asserted that the American Government had not persisted in demanding an answer to their communication of the 22nd of May, 1838, whereas Mr. Forsyth distinctly stated, in the correspondence which was befo.e the world, that Mr. Stevenson would not be instructed to press for an answer, because Mr. Fox had told him that he expected an imswer direct from this coun- try in a few days What he (Mr. Hume) wanted was, to have on the table of the House those papers which would Citnvince the House tliat the noble lord the Secretary ot State for Foreign Affairs, who, on a former occasion, stated that he had transniUled an answer to the American Go- ri'inmcnt, never had Iransinitted '.'/ vp hour. '\ he ri;'ht hon. baronet the nicmher for 'I'amworth, Appendix. 161 stated some time ago, that there must be a limit to the patience of the House regarding the refusal of public docu- ments, and, in his (Mr. Hume's) opinion, that time had now arrived. Had the documents connected with the affairs of Syria been produced when he (Mr. Hume) had moved for them, he was convinced that the affairs of the East would have been settled much sooner, and much of the loss which the country had since sustained would have been avoided. He only wanted, in the present case, the printed correspon- dence ; he wanted no secrets, and he hoped the House would support him in endeavouring to compel the noble lord to produce it. Had he been furnished with it sooner, the question would have been forced upon the attention of the Government, and might before this have been completely settled. Lord J. Russell said, that the production of the cor- respondence in question would not enable the hon. gentleman to attain the object he had in view. The American Go- vernment had asked for redress for the burning of the Caroline, and to that demand Her Majesty's Government had deliberately, and not through any neglect, thought it proper not to give a formal and final answer. But his noble friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had since informed the American Minister at the Court of Lon- don that the British Government had justified the destruc- tion of the Caroline; upon which the American Minister made a communication to his Government, which comnui- nication had not yet transpired. His noble friend (Lord Palmerston) was therefore perfectly justified in the statement iic had made on a former occasion. Mr. Hume said, that since the 9>9>nd of May, 1838, when the American Government sent a commurication to Lord Palmerston, requesting satisfaction, up to the present, or, at least, up to the period at which he (Mr. Hume) last bitro- duced the question to the notice of the House, no answer had been given, verbally or by letter, to that coninuinica- tion ; so that the House had been entirely misled and abused by the allegation of the noble lord, that an answer had been given. Sir U. Peel understood tlie noble lord the Secretary for 162 Appendix. the Colonies to meet the motion of the hon. member by de- claring that negociations connected with the subject were now pending, that they were conducted on both sides in an amicable spirit — (Hear, hear,) and that the production of the correspondence moved for would be prejudicial to the public service. Now, he confessed that a statement of that kind, coming from a Minister of the Crown, was, with him (Sir R. Peel), conclusive. — (Heai\hear.) Without offering any opinion upon the unfortunate state of ignorance they were in at present respecting our foreign relations, he must say that it would be most unwise to attempt to force a Minister of the Crown to produce a correspondence after such a declaration as the noble lord had made. He wished to ask the noble lord what position Mr. M'^Leod himself was in at present. He understood that the British Government had avowed the destruction of the Caroline as a public act, and had called on the Government of the United States to release Mr. M'^Leod. In what position did the matter now stand ? Would he be released, or would the law be allowed to take its course ? Lord J. llussELL said that the statement made in answer to Mr. Fox was, that the Attorney-General of the United States Government had proceeded to the place at which the trial of Mr. M*^Leod was expected to take place, and would there act according to certain instructions he had received from the American Government, which he (Lord J. Russell) did not deem it necessary to state to the House ; that the Attorney-General had not himself taken any steps in the matter ; but that the counsel for Mr. M*^Leod having stated that one of his defences was that the act had been autho- rized by the British Government, applied to have the case removed to a federal court, and that that application was granted. He (Lord J. Russell) trusted that the American Governnien'. would, when in a federal court, do that which he was told they could only do in a federal court. •. Mr. W. S. CBrien hoped the noble lord would not re- fuse those documents which had already appeared in the American papers. Surely no inconvenience would arise from their production. Sir R. VvA-A. hoped the noble lord would refuse them, as Appendic. 163 I lie thought that tlie application for or granting of just so much inforviation as another country possessed would be very derogatory to the British Parliament. The statements already published were of an ex parte character, and might give a most unfavour.able view of the case as regarded this country. So that by agreeing to the suggestion of the hon. gentleman, they might be giving their sanction to these un- favourable and perhaps unjust statements. — (Hear, hear.) Sir D. L. Evans could not understand the object of pressing for papers which the hon. gentleman had already read, after the declaration of the noble lord. Mr. P. Howard thought it indelicate, just as both coun- tries were deploring the loss of the late President of the United States, and just as a new governor had assumed the office, to press such a motion as this on the attention of that House. Mr. T. DuNCOMBE observed, that according to the right hon. baronet the member for Tamworth this country should not possess the same information as was possessed by other countries. They only asked for the papers relating to the arrest of Mr. M*^Leod, and why the British Parliament sliould not have them as well as the Congress of the United States he was at a loss to conceive. Whether the informa- tion were withheld or not, lie wished to know if the Go- vernment intended to allow the trial of Mr. M<^Leod to be j)roceeded with ; because the feeling throughout the country was this — that our national honour was compromised by the detention in prison of Mr. M^Leod. The guilt or innocence of Mr. M'^Leod had nothing to do with the question, as it was notorious that the Government would escape from the dilemma by the proof of Mr. M^Leod not having been present at the destruction of the Caro- line. But Mr. M"'Leod had been arrested and detained in prison, and if they had a right to detain him, they hati a right to try him, and if to try him to execute him, should he be found guilty. What he wanted to know therefore was, whether, in the event of such a verdict, the (government intended to allow Mr. M'^Leod to be executed.? Because, if not, they sliould have stopped the matter in 164 Appendix. limine, and not allowed him to be thrown into prison. Suppose Captain Drew was travelling in the United States, was arrested, tried, and found guilty, would it be borne that an English officer was so to be treated by a foreign coun- try for obeying the orders of his own ? He asked, there- fore, did the Government mean to allow Mr. M'^Leod'*s trial to proceed? He had been already imprisoned for six months, and the people of England had a right to know why. Sir R. Peel observed, Ma^ the question was not whether Mr. M'^Leod — respecting whose arrest and imprisonment he (Sir R. Peel) would give no opinion whatever — ought to be released or not, but whether these papers, the pro- duction of which the noble lord had told them would be prejudicial to the negociations which were now being carried on in an amicable spirit between the two countries, should be laid upon the table of the House. — (Hear, hear.) Strangers then withdrew for a division, but none took place, and the motion was negatived. No. X. (Extract.) ME. FOX TO MB. WEBSTEE. Washington, March 1% 184!l. The undersigned is now instructed again to demand from the Government of the United States, formally, in the name of the British Government, the immediate release of Mr. Alexander M^Leod. The grounds upon which the British Government make this demand upon the Government of the United States are these : that the transaction on account of which Mr. Alexan- der M^^^Leod has been arrested, and is to be put upon his trial, was a transaction of a public character, planned and executed by persons duly empowered by Her Majesty's colo- nial authorities to take any steps and to do any acts which might be necessary for the defence of Her Majesty's territo- ries, and for the protection of Her Majesty's subjects ; and •ison. ftates, that took Appendi.p. 165 that, consequently, those subjects of Her Majesty who en- gaged in that transaction were performing an act of public duty for which they cannot be made personally and indivi- dually answerable to the laws and tribunals of any foreign country. The transaction in question may have been, as Her Ma- jesty's Government are of opinion that it was, a justifiable employment of force for the purpose of defending the Bri- tish territory from the unprovoked attack of a band of British rebels and American pirates, who, having been per- mitted to arm and organize themselves within the territory of the United States, had actually invaded and occupied a portion of the territory of Her Majesty ; or it may have been, as alleged by Mr. Forsyth, in his note to the under- signed of the 26th of December, " a most unjustifiable in- " vasion, in time of peace, of the territory of the United " States.*" But this is a question especially of a political and international kind, which can be discussed and settled only between the two Governments, and which the courts of justice of the State of New York cannot, by possibility, have any means of judging or any right of deciding. (Extract.) MR. WEBSTEE TO MR. FOX. Washington, April 24, 1841. The undersigned has now to signify to Mr. Fox that the Government of the United States has not changed the opinion which it has heretofore expressed to Her Majesty's Government of the character of the act of destroying the « Caroline." It does not think that that transaction can be justified by any reasonable application or construction of the right of self-defence under the laws of nations. It is admitted that a just right of self-defence attaches always to nations as well as to individuals, and is equally necessary for the preserva- tion of both. But the extent of this right is a question to be judged of by the circumstances of each particular case. 160 Appcndiv and when its allcpjed oxcrciso has led to the counHisslon of liostile acts within the territory of a power at peace, nothin/jp less than a clear and absolute necessity can afford ground of justification. Not having up to this time been nuule ac- quainted with the views and reasons at length, which have led Her Majesty''s Govornnient to think tlie destruction of the " Caroline"" justifiable as an act of self-defence, the un- dersigned, earnestly renewing the remonstrance of this Go- vernment against the transaction, abstains for the present, from any extended discussion of the question. But it is deemed proper, nevertheless, not to omit to take some notice of the general grounds of justification stated by Her Ma- jesty''s Government on their instruction to Mr, Fox. Her Majesty's Government have instructed Mr. Fox to say, that tliey are of opinion that the transaction which ter- minated in the destruction of the '' Caroline,"" was a justi- fiable employment of force, for the purpose of defending the British Territory from the unprovoked attack of a band of British rebels and American pirates, who, having been " per- mitted"" to arm and organize tliemselves within the territory of the United States, had actually invaded a j)ortion of the territory of Her Majesty. The President cannot suppose tliut Her Majesty's Go- vernment, by the use of these terms, meant to be under- stood as intimating that these acts, violating the laws of the United States and disturbing the peace of the British Ter- ritories, were done under any degree of countenance from this Government, or were regarded by it with indifference; or, that under the circumstances of the case, they could have been prevented by the ordinary course of proceeding. Al- though he regrets that, by using the term « permitted,'' a possible inference of that kind mioht be raised, yet such an inference, the President is willing to believe, would be quite unjust to the intentions of the British Government. That, on a line of frontier, such as separates the United States from Her Britannic Majesty's North American Pro- vince.;, a line long enough to divide the whole of Europe into halves, irregularities, violences, and conflicts should some- times occur, equally against the will of both Governments, is Appvinliv. 167 [ion of othiiijl^ und of ule ac- |h littvc tion of the iin- his Go- Irt'sent, It it is notice er Ma- l\)X to ich ter- i justi- ingtlie )an(i (if 1 " per- -^rritory 1 of the y's Go- under- » of the ih Ter- re from jrence ; Id have r. Al- ;ted," a ueh an e quite United n Pro- pe into sonie- ?nts. is certainl)' easily to be suppos(>d. This may he more |K)S8ihle, ))erhaps, in regard to the United States, witiiout any reproach to their Government, since their institutions entirely discour- age the keeping uj) of large standing armies in time of peace, and their situation happily exempts them from the necessity of maintaining such expensive and dangerous establish- ments. All tiiat can be expected from either Government, in these cases, is good faith, a sincere desire to preserve peace and do justice, the use of all ])roper means of preven- tion, and that if offences cannot, nevertheless, be always prevented, the offenders shall still be justly punished. In all these respects, this Government acknowledges no delin- quency in the performance of its duties. Her Majesty's Government are pleased, also, to speak of those American citizens, who took part with persons in Canada, engaged in an insurrection against the British Go- vernment as " Anierican pirates."' The undersigned does not admit the propriety or justice of this designation. If citizens of the United States fitted out, or were engaged in fitting out, a military expedition from the United States, in- teniled to act against the British Government in Canada, they were clearly violating the laws of their own country, and exposing themselves to the just consequences which might be indicted on them, if taken within the British do- minions. But notwithstanding this, they were certainly not pirates, nor tloes the undersigned think that it can advance the purpose of fair and friendly discussion, or hasten the accommodation of national difficulties, so to denominate them, l^heir offence, whatever it was, had no analogy to cases of piracy. Supposing all that is alleged against them to be true, they were taking a part in what they regarded as a civil war, and they were taking a part on the side of the rebels. Surely England herself has not regarded j)er- sons thus engaged as deserving the appellation which Her Majesty's Government bestows on these citizens of the United States. It is quite notorious that, for the greater part of the last two centuries, subjects of the Britisii Crown have been per- mitted to engage in foreign wars, both national and civil. 168 Appi'udiv. and in the latter in every stage of their progress ; and yet it has not been imagined that England has at any time allowed her suhjects to turn pirates. Indeed in our own tini'^j not only have individual subjects of that Crown gone ahroac to engage in civil wars, but we have seen whole regiments openly recruited, embodied, armed, and disciplined in Eng- land, with the avowed purpose of aiding a rebellion against a nation with which England was at peace. The Government of the United States has not, from the first, fallen into the doubts elsewhere entertained, of the true extent of the duties of neutrality. It has held that, however it may have been in less enlightened ages, the just interpretation of the modern law of nations is, that neutral States are bound to be strictly neutral, and that it is a mani- fest and gross impropriety for individuals to engage in the civil conflicts of other States, and thus to be at war while their Government is at peace. War and peace are high na- tional relations, which can properly be established or changed only by nations themselves. The undersigned trusts, that when Her Britannic Majes- ty's Government shall present the grounds at length, on which they justify the local authorities of Canada, in at- tacking and destroying the " Caroline,'^ they will consider that the laws of the United States are such as the under- signed has now represented them, and that the Government of the United States has always manifested a sincere dispo- sition to see those laws effectually and impartially adminis- tered. If there have been cases in which individuals, justly obnoxious to punishment, have escaped, this is no more than happens in regard to other laws. Under these circumstances, and under those immediately connected with the transaction itself, it will be for Her Majesty ""s Government to show upon what state of facts, and what rules of national law, the destruction of the " Caroline" is to be defended. - LUNIJON : PRINTED BY J. MITCHELL AND CO., (LATK BUET'lELL,) UUPEKT STREET, IIAYMARKET. lul yoi it fn tim-:.:. ahroai' tginients I in Kn^- against Toni the , of the Id timt, the just neutral a inani- l^e in the ar wliile high na- changed c Majes- ngth, on a, in at- consider ? under- ernment •e dispo- idminis- s, justly are than ediately For Her •f facts, of the \VO/{f\S c.rpos'nif/ (hr l)(H)f/rr of En<)lanil, (ind lis (^tusefi. EXPOSITION OK TItAXSACTIOX.S in CENTRAL ASIA, through which tho Barriors to the Ihitlsh Possessions in India, have hccn Hacrificed to Russia, hv VISCOUNT PAL- MERSTON. By D. UitCiDiiAiiT, Es(i. (Jno Vol. Quarto. [_Lonffman and Co. THE CRISIS :— Franco, in Face of tlie Four Powers. Treaty of ir)th July. Second Edition. *' We will inarch by Coiistantinoplf on Paris."- .l/oicou; Gazrttp. [_Fra8er. Exposition of the Process through which tho Award settling the BOUNDARY uetween GREAT BRITAIN and the UNITED STATES, has been set aside by Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Second Edition. [_Fraser. CORRESPONDENCE between Lord Palmehston, Mr. Back- nousE, and Mr. Urquuart, relative to " Tho Affair of the Vixen," " The Portfolio," &c. THE PRUSSIAN LEAGUE. By W. Cakoill, Esq. MEHEMET ALI encouraged to revolt, as a Pretext for the Treaty of 15th July. By the same Author. \_John Reid. REASONS FOR DEMANDING INVESTIGATION INTO THE CHARGES AGAINST LORD PALMERSTON. By Robert Monteitii, Esq. [^Collins, Glaar/oic. REPLY to an Article in the Dublin University Magazine, entitled, " IS LORD PALMERSTON A TRAITOR V By the same Author. [_Collins^ Glasgow. STATEMENTS and DOCUMENTS on the SULPHUR MONOPOLY, constituting Grounds for demanding Parliamen- tary Inquiry into the Conduct of Lord Palmurstou. \Joh)i Reid' Jf)8 Works e.rposmfi the Dawjcr of Enrjland^ and its (Jnusa^s. CASE OF MCLEOD, in whose Person tl.o (Vown of Groat Britain lias been tried for Felony liefore a .rndicatory of a Foreiirrn State. Fourth Edition, Revised. " Parliaments alone cannot save, hut Parliaments alone mav rnin, a State."— A'iV W. Tenip/e. /jonr/mmi. DIPLOMACY AND COMMF.RCF., some CONVERSA- TIONS with Merchants and Oi)eratives. [^Frascr. PRESENT AND FUTTTRE PROSPJ^CTS oi OIR INDIAN EMPIRE. By Captain AVestmacott. {^Hooper. THE PORTFOLIO ; a Collection of State Papers and other Documents and Correspondence, Historical, Diplomatic, and Commercial. [^RUlr/tcaf/. OPINIONS ON T[IE EASTERN QUESTION. By David Ross, of Bladonsburg, Esij. \_Rid(firai/. PROGRESS OF RUSSIA IN TllJC EAST. By Sir John McNeill. Second Edition. [J. Murray. TURKEY, AND ITS RESOUJtCES. ITS MUNICI1»AL ORGANIZATION, AND FREE IRADi:. Jiy D. Urqu- IIART, Esq. \_Sanndi'rs and Oth'ii. ENGLAND, FRANCE, liUSSIA, AND TURKEY. Fifth Edition. By the same Author. {_Rid(jwai/. THE SULTAN AND MEIIEMET ALL By the same Author. Third Edition. \_Rhhjwaij , SPIRIT OF TIH: east. By the sani^ Author. Second Edition. \_CoUiurn. THE AUSTRIAN TREATY analysed, and its haneful Tendency exp»)8ed. By W. CAuriiLL, I'scj. \_J(diu Reid. AFFAIR OP TDK VIXEN. Third IMition. IHutchurd. DEBATE IN THE FRENCH CHA^HiERS, on t' Treaty of the 15th July, 1840, contained in the Moniteur Universel, during November and December 1840, (the juoyi important revelations of recent times). DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF C0]\B[ONS, 1st June, 1829, on the General Position of Russia in rt^u'ai'd to Turkey and Persia. I'HiNTEi) bv J. MITCHELL ANU CO., (late i(ki;t ri;i.i.\, Kl l'l;UT sintET, i.lAYMAHKUT, LUNUU.S. Causes. 1 of Chr at jatorv of a ■ ruin, ;i Longman. NVERSA- \_Fi'ai(er. i INDIAN \_[Ioopcr. i and otluT omatic, and [^Ri(lf/wai/. [ON. By [_RhJgii'ai/, r h'lTi John V. Murray. [JNICirAL y I). Urqu- rs and Oth'i/. EY. Fifth \_Rid(jway. y tlio same \^Ridf/waf/. i>r. Second [J'oJbnrn. its l»:ineful [_Jo/m Reid. [^Ilatchard. 1 1' ^JVcatv ur rnivcrsol, )3t important S, 1st Jnne, ■d to Turkey I'Lur srnEET,