« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
See circular of Mr. Cass, Sec. of State, to United States attorneys, marshals, and collectors, Sept. 18, 1857, 47 MS. Dom. Let. 362.
As to the execution of Col. Crabb and his associates, see H. Ex. Doc. 64, 35 Cong. 1 sess.
As to the alleged violation of the neutrality laws of the United States in 1863 by Mr. Segur, Salvadorean minister, see Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Walker, U. S. dist. attorney at New York, July 21, 1888, 169 MS. Dom. Let. 207, acknowledging the receipt of the latter's letter of July 21, 1888.
"What have been called expeditions organized within our limits for foreign service have been only the departure of unassociated individuals. Such a departure, though several may go at the same time, constitutes no infringement of our neutrality laws, no violation of neutral obligations, and furnishes no ground for the arraignment of this Government by any foreign power."
Mr. Marcy, Sec. of State, to Mr. Escalante, May 8, 1856, MS. Notes to
September 18, 1857, Mr. Cass, as Secretary of State, issued a circular to United States attorneys, marshals, and collectors, calling upon them to enforce the neutrality laws of the United States against lawless persons who were believed to be engaged within the limits of the United States in setting on foot and preparing the means for military expeditions to be carried on against the territories of Mexico, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica, a copy of which circular was, on October 2, 1857, sent by the Secretary of the Navy to various officers of the Navy. Among these was Commander Frederick Chatard, commanding the U. S. S. Saratoga, at Colon. Commander Chatard was present with his ship at Punta Arenas, Nicaragua, when on November 25, 1857, the steamer Fashion arrived there from Mobile, having on board a large number of " passengers." These passengers proved to be William Walker and 150 followers, all of whom were permitted to land without interference. Commander Chatard was afterwards suspended from command on account of his nonaction on this occasion. On the 6th of December, Commodore Paulding arrived at Punta Arenas, and on the 8th of the month demanded of Walker the surrender of his arms and the embarcation of his entire band. The men were placed on board the Saratoga and sent to New York, but, before the departure of that ship Walker was taken by Commodore Paulding on board his flagship, the Wabash, which landed Walker at Colon, where he took a steamer to New York, under engagement to present himself on his arrival to the United States marshal. On March 19, 1858, Commodore Paulding landed the arms at the New York navy-yard, the Navy Department having ordered that they should be delivered to the owner or owners who should show a sufficient title, the United States having no claim upon
them. President Buchanan took the view that Commodore Paulding in capturing Walker and his command, "after they had landed on the soil of Nicaragua," although it was done with the assent of the authorities of the country, had committed a grave error. This error, said President Buchanan, consisted in " landing his sailors and marines in Nicaragua, whether with or without her consent, for the purpose of making war upon any military force whatever which he might find in the country, no matter from whence they came." Under these circumstances, when Marshal Rynders, on December 29, 1857, presented himself at the Department of State with Walker in custody, Mr. Cass informed him that the executive department of the Government did not recognize Walker as a prisoner and had no directions to give concerning him, and that it was only through the action of the judiciary that he could be lawfully held in custody to answer any charges that might be brought against him.
Special message of President Buchanan to the Senate, Jan. 7, 1858, S. Ex.
"A Government is responsible only for the faithful discharge of its inter-
"Let the memories of past annoyances endured by Costa Rica as well as
October 19, 1864, a party of twenty or more persons, acting in the interest of the Confederate States, who had been commorant in Canada, raided the town of St. Albans, Vt., fired shots at various persons, of whom one was killed; set fire to several buildings, and appropriated
the funds of the banks, together with horses and other property. They then returned to Canada, where some of them were arrested. The incident formed the subject of an extended diplomatic correspondence. Claims against Great Britain in behalf of the citizens of the United States who were injured or suffered losses were presented to the mixed commission under Art. XIII. of the treaty of May 8, 1871. These claims were unanimously disallowed, on the ground that the enterprise was conducted with such secrecy that no care or diligence which one nation might reasonably require of another in such cases would have been sufficient to discover it. It appeared that the raiders came over to St. Albans, not in organized form, but apparently as peaceable travelers by railroad and not in company, and stopped at the village hotels.
Moore, Int. Arbitrations, IV. 4042-4054.
For the diplomatic correspondence, see Dip. Cor. 1864, II. 341, 355, 750,
As to the recovery and return of money to the St. Albans bank by the
For the extradition proceedings in the case, see 1 Moore on Extradition,
The activity of the Fenian Brotherhood in raising movements and stirring up insurrection against the British Government in Ireland and in Canada formed the subject of correspondence between the governments of the United States and Great Britain in 1865 and subsequent years, some of the persons implicated in these affairs having proceeded from the United States. During the sessions of the joint high commission at Washington, in 1871, the British commissioners brought forward claims of the people of Canada for injuries suffered from Fenian expeditions carried out from the United States. The American commissioners declined to entertain the claims, as they did not come within the class of subjects indicated by Sir Edward Thornton in his note of January 26, 1871, as being referred to the consideration of the commission. The British commissioners did not urge the settlement of the claims by the commission, and stated that they had less difficulty in taking this course, as a portion of the claims "were of a constructive and inferential character." In the diplomatic correspondence, the United States maintained that it had fully performed its full duties as a neutral in repressing any ascertainable attempts to violate the neutrality laws, and that neither the character of the agitation nor the condition of international relations rendered it wise for the United States to denounce the proceedings of the agitators, as long as they confined themselves "within those limits of
moral agitation which are recognized as legitimate equally by the laws of the United States and by those of Great Britain."
Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Burnley, British chargé, March 20, 1865, Dip. Cor. 1865, II. 103; Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Adams, min. to England, No. 1709 (confid.), March 10, 1866, Dip. Cor. 1866, I. 77.
As to the proceedings of the joint high commission, see Moore, Int. Arbitrations, I. 687.
As to the effect of President Johnson's proclamation in putting down cooperation in the United States with the Fenian invasion of Canada, see Bemis's American Neutrality, 92.
In March, 1866, Mr. Seward was confidentially informed of the arrival at Buffalo, New York, consigned to an Irish resident of that city, of sundry boxes filled with arms, cartridges, and other munitions of war. He was also furnished with a public advertisement extracted from a newspaper published in the same city in which a committee solicited aid "in establishing a republican form of government in Ireland." "Our field of operations," said the advertisement, "is guessed at by the public, and subscribers can rest assured that work of the most active character is meant." These incidents, said Mr. Seward, occurring simultaneously with popular meetings held in various parts of the country at which contributions of men, money, and arms were solicited for the purpose avowed, in some instances of levying war against Great Britain and Ireland, and in others of levying war against the same power in British America, had engaged the attention of the President and had made it his duty to ask the Attorney-General to instruct the attorneys and marshals of the United States to be vigilant in preventing any violation of the neutrality laws and of bringing before the courts of justice all persons who might be found to have engaged in such unlawful attempts.
Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Speed, At. Gen., April 2, 1866, 72 MS.
"The Prince Maximilian is either a principal or a subordinate belligerent in Mexico. The treaty which has been made between Austria and that belligerent by which the former authorizes the organization within the Austrian dominions of two thousand or more volunteers, manifestly to be engaged in war against the Republic of Mexico, is deemed by this Government inconsistent with the principle of neutrality, and an engagement with Maximilian in his invasion of that Republic."
Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Motley, min. to Austria, April 30, 1866,
See supra, § 958.
In the summer of 1883 a schooner called the Ounalaska, which was said to have been "equipped" with "warlike supplies for the insurgents in Salvador," was seized in the port of Acajutla and was, together with her cargo, condemned by the supreme court of Salvador as lawful prize for the benefit of the state. Immediately after this sentence the Salvadorean Government placed the vessel “at the disposal of the American Government, under whose flag she was sailing, as a proof of special deference and consideration towards the United States of America ;" and she was sent in charge of the U. S. S. Ranger to San Francisco. The Department of State and the Department of Justice concurred in the opinion that the schooner thus became the property of the United States, subject only to the consent of Congress to the acceptance of the gift from the Government of Salvador. Meanwhile the Secretary of the Navy was requested to direct the proper naval officers at San Francisco to take charge of the schooner, which was then in the custody of the United States civil authorities, till such time as the President should have been informed of the determination of Congress, and the Attorney-General was desired to consider the possibility of prosecuting the persons who had been concerned in sending her out from San Francisco, especially in connection with section 5286 of the Revised Statutes.
Mr. John Davis, Act. Sec. of State, to the At. Gen., Aug. 29, 1883, 148 MS. Dom. Let. 80; Mr. John Davis, Act. Sec. of State, to the Act. At Gen., Sept. 25, 1883, id. 233; Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Sec. of Navy, Oct. 9, 1883, id. 336; Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to the Act. At. Gen., Oct. 10, 1883, id. 343.
On March 23, 1884, the British minister confidentially communicated to Mr. Frelinghuysen, Secretary of State, a dispatch from the governor-general of Canada, touching rumors persistently circulated in the press of the United States that a Fenian movement was in progress in the States adjoining the northwest provinces of the Dominion. The governor-general referred to the importance of being supplied with any information possessed or obtainable by the United States authorities on the subject. Mr. Frelinghuysen replied that, when in the preceding February the rumors in question came to his knowledge, inquiries were set on foot through the War Department, and confidential instructions were sent to General Terry, commanding the Department of Dakota, who reported that, after inquiries made through his subordinates, no indications could be discovered of such a project as was alleged, and that the story was the invention of an unscrupulous writer for the press.
Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to the Hon. Sackville West, British min.,