Smith O'Brien's one day's campaign in 1848. Were it not that it was actually attended with loss of life, and that its instigators, though contemptible as rebel leaders, have shown themselves dangerous agitators, we should hardly think it worthy to be treated seriously. It appears from the return that at Castlemartyr, in the county of Cork, the police station was defended successfully by six men, while the "supposed number of insurgents" was four hundred; at Kilmallock, where the attack lasted for several hours, and the Fenians used every effort to subdue their enemy, there were from first to last only fifteen policemen engaged against three hundred. At Emly six were opposed to two hundred or three hundred; but the most extraordinary case is that of Palmerstown, where the "number of constables engaged" was one. In this memorable defence sub-constable John Blair by himself repulsed a number of Fenians "not known, the night being dark, but it must have been considerable." Afterwards follows a list of the stations to which parties of police belonged who met and successfully engaged the insurgents in places other than the police stations. The most notable of the adventures here reported occurred at Mallow. Three constables are described as encountering three hundred rebels. It is explained that they accompanied a detachment of the 71st regiment "to represent the civil power when in pursuit of the insurgents." "The military, having their knapsacks on, were unable to proceed as quickly as the constabulary, who arrested three men in advance of the military (about two miles) and brought them prisoners to Bottle Hill, on the 6th of March, 1867." After this we are not surprised to learn that in the neighborhood of Dublin sixteen policemen successfully encountered six hundred rebels, and that at Westgate, in Drogheda, twenty-seven discomfited one thousand. The conclusion we would draw from these facts is that the Fenian conspiracy has been shown, by its abortive outbreak, and by the indifference with which its suppression is regarded, to be beneath the extreme severity of a wise government. The excuses made for it by a certain class of radicals here and in Ireland will, indeed, find approval with very few men of sense. These Fenian leaders are morally as bad as any traitors that ever suffered death. They have come to this country intent upon murder and pillage; they have infected the most ignorant part of the Irish people with ideas subversive of government, property, and national prosperity; they have in several cases returned to their enterprise after being released by the Irish executive; they have cost Ireland millions by the check to its prosperity they have inflicted. They have actually "levied war," and murder has been committed by one at least of the bands which they called into activity. If it were necessary to give such a warning to future marauders as the infliction on one or more of them of the punishment of death, the government would be fully justified in allowing the law to take its course. But there is reason to believe that the danger is past, the strength of the British government understood even by the most reckless, and the imbecility of the Fenian leaders appreciated by nearly all their dupes. To send these men to penal servitude will be a wiser course than to give their memory the dignity of death in a political cause. A factitious importance attends such a fate which has often lifted into posthumous honor men very commonplace and not very upright. There is enough of sympathy with the Fenian cause among the multitude for them to make a martyr of any one who may die with decent courage, but not enough to gild the unromantic and obscure fate of an ordinary convict. We may urge also that if in Canada, where the whole province was kept in alarm for months, and where there was a real invasion and loss of life, the British government directed the commutation of the sentence, it can hardly be necessary to execute them here. If danger from the conspiracy is to be apprehended, and severity is excusable, it is rather across the Atlantic, where armed Fenians are said to be reckoned by hundreds of thousands, than with us, where they may be troublesome, but can never be formidable. The Americans, when they interceded with our government for the lives of the Fenians convicted in Canada, did certainly not preach where they were unprepared to practice. Since the conclusion of the war, the North, though severe on the southern community, has given way to no animosities against individuals. No one has been put to death in America for what the North has declared to be treason; very few have been molested if they chose to acquiesce in the restored rule and to take no part in politics. The leniency of the government has, however, been carried to its furthest point by the release on bail of Mr. Jefferson Davis after a captivity of two years. Whether he will ever be brought to trial seems to be still uncertain; but we may almost predict that in any case the punishment inflicted on him will not be extreme. We can see that in the case of America this is the wisest policy, and that it is best not to give renewed rancor to the animosities of the South by any act of severity. A similar forbearance would have its good effects on Ireland also. Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. No. 1986.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, SIR: Your despatch of the 2d of May, No. 1361, has been received. There is no reason why you should not give Lord Stanley a full copy of my despatch No. 1965. My confidential despatch of May 2d, No. 1971, will have removed from your mind any impression that the President may be expected to accede to the limitation upon the arbitration of the Alabama claims which Lord Stanley proposed. The United States are thus in the attitude of insisting upon the claims, as they have consistently done from the beginning, and of declining to accede to arbitration thereupon with limitations hitherto insisted upon by her Majesty's government. I am, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. . No. 1370.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: A few days ago a gentleman by the name of W. W. Holmes requested an interview with me for a purpose which I will now proceed to explain: He said that he was an agent for the Mexican bondholders in London, and in that capacity he wished to consult me in regard to the possibility of entering into some negotiation with the government at Washington on this subject. I replied that the subject of Mexico had not been brought within my province, at least, since the first year I came to this country. I was entirely unable, therefore, to speak with authority in answer to his question. So far as I could venture to give my private impression of the policy of my government, it was that they did not incline to depart from the rule of non-intervention in the affairs of Mexico which had been laid down at the beginning of the war. Mr. Holmes went on to state his case, which was substantially this: The English bondholders held claims upon Mexico for a very considerable sum of money, which had been secured to them, under the sanction of both governments, by setting apart for the payment of the interest and principal a considerable proportion of the net receipts accruing from the custom-houses on the Atlantic side, and the whole of those accruing from the Pacific side. I understood him to say that these receipts had been regularly paid over to them for a period coming down to about 18 months ago, since which they had not obtained anything. They had also had secured to them large tracts of territory in the province of Sonora, and, perhaps, another province. It had occurred to him that in any negotiations which the United States might have with Mexico, it might not prove disadvantageous to the latter if they should first possess themselves by a complete cession from the bondholders of all these securities guaranteed to them under the sanction of these treaties. I replied I could give no opinion on that subject, and still less any encouragement to the idea of such a purchase. He asked if I had any objection to make a communication of this proposal to my government. I said I should be willing to report the conversation as a matter of intelligence, without in any way officially committing myself to the bondholders as favoring the proposal. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. No. 1990.] Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, May 27, 1867. SIR: With reference to my communications of the 15th instant, No. 1981, and 17th instant, No. 1984, concerning the case of William Jackson, otherwise called John McCafferty, reported as under sentence of death for alleged high treason in Ireland, I enclose for your information a copy of a letter of the 18th instant, received at this department on the 25th, from James J. Rogers, esq., of New York city. I am, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Mr. Rogers to Mr. Seward. LAW OFFICE OF JAMES J. ROGERS, SIR: I have the honor to call your attention to my letter of the 13th instant, the receipt of which you kindly acknowledged on the 15th instant. In that communication I stated that the proofs of the birth and citizenship of William Jackson, otherwise John McCafferty, now or lately imprisoned in Mountjoy prison, at or near Dublin, Ireland, were expected by me from McCafferty's birth-place, Sandusky city, Ohio, On Thursday of this week I received from Ireland a copy of a newspaper called the "Freeman's Journal," published at Dublin, May 3, 1867, in which, among other reports of the proceedings on the trial of McCafferty, the following appears, viz: "THE FENIAN TRIALS—THE SPECIAL COMMISSION-TRIAL OF CAPTAIN M'CAFFERTY. "At the sitting of the court yesterday morning at 10 o'clock, the prisoner, John McCafferty, having been placed at the bar, was sworn as to the contents of an affidavit on which to ground a motion to have his trial postponed. “Mr. BUTT then said: My lords, I appear on behalf of the prisoner at the bar to apply to your lordships to postpone this trial, and I do so on the following affidavit: [Counsel then read the affidavit made by the prisoner, from which it appeared that he was a naturalborn citizen of the United States of America, and that he had been indicted at the last special commission for the county of Cork, and that on that occasion the jury who tried him was composed half of foreigners. For the purposes of that trial he handed to his attorney, who appeared for him at Cork, certain official documents of the republic of the United States authenticating the fact of his having been a natural-born citizen of America.] He had applied for those papers, and they had not been found. He now wished for time to obtain those papers for the purpose of showing that he was a natural-born citizen of the United States. At the trial in Cork it was admitted by the Crown that the prisoner was a natural-born citizen, and of this fact he believed one of their lordships had judicial notice. He [Mr. Butt] need scarcely tell their lordships that it would make a very great difference on his trial to show that he was a natural-born citizen of the United States. "The CHIEF JUSTICE. In treason? 66 "Mr. BUTT. Yes, my lord; unless he were found guilty of having committed some overt act in this country he could not be found guilty of high treason. "Mr. Justice FITZGERALD said he believed that was the ground on which he was committed. "Mr. BUTT then asked their lordships to adjourn this trial to the last in the commission, in order that in the mean time an application might be made to the American ambassador in London for the required evidence as to birth. "The ATTORNEY GENERAL said he was quite prepared to relieve his learned friend of any difficulty by admitting for the purposes of this trial, whether the fact was so or not, that the prisoner was an alien and a natural-born citizen of the United States of America. "Mr. BUTT. That my lords, was the object of this application. "Justice FITZGERALD stated that he was aware that on the trial of the prisoner in Cork it was admitted by the Crown that he was born at the place named. Mr. Smartt, the deputy clerk of the Crown, having called over the long panel, informed the prisoner that he was now put upon trial for his life on a charge of high treason, and of his right to challenge the jurors." It is presumed that the admission thus made by the government of Great Britain through their attorney general, and the judicial notice taken of the .fact by Justice Fitzgerald, of the court by which McCafferty was about to be tried, will render any further efforts on his part, or on that of his friends, towards obtaining additional proof of his birth and citizenship in the United States, unnecessary, and that the fact will be accepted by the American government as true. The case, then, so far as the fact of McCafferty's American citizenship and his right to call upon the American government for protection and redress are concerned, is complete. He therefore makes this demand of the American government, in order that he may be released from imprisonment and permitted to travel throughout the British dominions wheresoever an American citizen may travel by virtue of the law of nations and existing treaties. I feel assured, from your letter of the 15th instant, that his case will receive immediate attention, and I feel assured further that the attention will be commensurate with the high position which you occupy so ably, and commensurate with the proud dignity of American citizenship. I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State. JAMES J. ROGERS, Attorney, &c. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. No. 1374.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, May 28, 1867. SIR: I ought, by last Saturday's steamer, to have mentioned to you the fact that I received, last week, a visit from the minister of Greece, M. Armeni Brailow, who brought with him M. Rangabee, the person commissioned as the first diplomatic representative to the United States from the kingdom of Greece. I am informed that he is a highly intelligent, cultivated, and experienced gentleman, who has had much experience in the management of public affairs at home. Hence, I doubt not, you will cheerfully receive him as a valuable acquisition to the diplomatic circle, by which you are surrounded. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. No. 1375.] Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: It was not until Thursday of last week that any doubts were entertained here as to the policy of the government towards the prisoners in Ireland who had been tried and condemned to die for their share in the latest attempt at insurrection. On Friday I received from Dublin a report of the reply of the lord lieutenant to the deputation which waited upon him to urge a remission of the extreme penalty, and it seemed so positive and unequivocal in its refusal that I felt at once the necessity of some action under your special instructions. At the same time the rumor became current here that the question, after deliberate consideration in a full cabinet, had been determined by the vote of a majority in favor of a most rigorous course. On Friday morning I received from the legal adviser of John McCafferty, one of the two prisoners, an elaborate opinion, given by Mr. Butt, the distinguished counsel engaged in his defence, pointing out the precise condition of the case, and the remaining doubt of the perfect legality of the conviction which might yet be raised in his behalf by a proceeding in appeal to a higher court. At the same time that Mr. Butt dwelt upon this weak point of the proceedings, he expressed a most unequivocal opinion upon the general fairness of the trial and the impossibility of making any ground of remonstrance against it as in violation of the principles of international law. He thought, however, that if the government were to refuse its assent to a writ of error, that might constitute good cause for intervention on the part of the United States. At the time of writing, however, it is proper to say that Mr. Butt fully believed it was not the intention of the government to exact the last penalty. Under these circumstances, I took the responsibility to write at once to Mr. West, giving him directions to authorize an application for a writ of error at the expense of the United States, whilst at the same time I addressed a note to Lord Stanley, a copy of which I now have the honor to transmit. In stating the case of Burke I presume him to be one of the persons of that name who served in the war, and whose name is found in the army list. But the fact is certain that no application for protection has been made by him to the consul; neither is anything positively known of his past history. I learn to-day that, so far from being an upholder of the government, he was a very determined and obstinate rebel, refusing to take the oath of allegiance at the close of the war. Be this as it may, the public feeling, both here and in Ireland, became at once so much excited by the news of the decision of the ministers, that strong deputations of members of Parliament and others were immediately organized and set in motion to procure a reconsideration of the decision. The result was a consultation of the cabinet on Saturday, at which it was determined to commute the sentences to imprisonment for life. A copy of Lord Stanley's note of the 26th instant, in answer to mine, and announcing this result, is herewith transmitted. Under these circumstances, not deeming it expedient to carry further the legal proceedings previously contemplated, I have given to Mr. West the necessary directions accordingly. There are still a few cases pending, the most difficult one being that of a youth of 17, by the name of McClure, a native of New York, who has been tried at Cork and pleaded guilty. He has also been sentenced to death, but I take it for granted that after the decision in these cases, no one less aggravated in its circumstances will fare worse. The difficulty attending any action on my part in the precise circumstances has not been felt to be trifling. On the one hand, the unquestionable guilt of. the parties, their very doubtful antecedents in our own struggle, and the want of proof of citizenship in the principal instance, impairing the legal force of any interposition whatever; and on the other, the danger of rousing the susceptibilities of the government and people here, already somewhat disturbed by a misconception of the sense of your application in Canada, as well as of implying menace where none was intended, rendered extreme caution necessary not to involve my principal by a misplaced word or a false step. From the tone of the reply of Lord Stanley, I think I may trust I escaped the gravest part of the responsibility. If in the performance of your injunctions I shall have proved to have met the expectations of the President, I shall then feel myself in every respect fully relieved. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, |