The Northern Daily Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-03-15 00:00:00

of that law

It is the solemn duty of the Government of the United
Statei to maintain this construction of their Neutrality Law,
and the attempt to set up and sustain a different one has
created much surprise; that it has been done by a friendly
government, with, which the United States are most anxious
to maintain and strengthen the relations of amity, is the
of deep regret..

Some satisfaction for the injury was confidently expected,
but nothing thAt chn be
_regarded in that' light has been
offered; and this gbyernment has been compelled, in vindi
cation,of its rights and laws, to take a course which it
sincerely hoped her Majesty's government woald,have ren-
dered nnnecessary.

Her Majesty's minister to this government, Mr. Cramp-
ton, his taken a conspicuous part in organising and
executing the scheme for recruiting for the .British army
within the United States.. Wer&it, possible, with due
regard to the evidence and disclosures in the case, to assign
hira a subordinate part in the scheme, even that would not
allow the. President to - change the 'coUrge, which he is
obliged, under the circumstances, to pursue towards him.
Any Tiltrtitipation in the project, as it has been-developed,
of rai.sinpreqruits .in this country for the British service.
was incompatible 'with his official relations with this

government. His connection with that affair has ren-
dered bim an unacceptable representative of.her Britannio
Majesty near this government, and you_ are directed
by the .President to ask her Majesty's government to

recall him.
Mr. Rowcrofr, the British Consul at Cincinnati, and Mr.
Matthew, the British Consul at Philadelphia are-implicated
in thelecrutting project, and you are further directed by
the President to ask for. their removal for that cause.
The persons connected with the British consulate at New
York.have been actively engaged in furthering the recruit.
-ing scheme. Mr.- Stanley, the assistant or clerk of the
consul, has taken a snore open and effective part than the
consul himself, and is now under an indictment for violating
the law against foreign recruiting. The consul, Mr. Barclay,
could not but know of Mr. Stanley's conduct in that matter,
but stilt-retains—him" in the consulate. Besides the
responsibility that rightfully' attaches to Mr. Barclay for
the improper conduct of an employe in his office, and under
his immediate and, daily' observation, this governmont is
satisfied that he has himself not only favoured the recruiting
for the British army, but has participated in it. Moreover,
the improper conduct of Mr. Barclay, in the case of the bark
Maury, has justly gi!en offence to the Commercial com-
munity in which he resides and with which he has official
re- connection.

unau-
and. it

For these reasons this' government deems it proper to
imitruct you to ask the government of Great Britain to
ir. Barclay from the post of British Consul at

withdr

New• York

The-final document is a letter dated Feb. Ist 1856, from
Mr. Rucganan to Mr. Marcy. Its contents relate to mutual
explanations. of previous ,conversarlons between Lord
Clarendon and Mr. Buchanan, and announces the presen-
tation—to his Lordship, by the latter, of Mr. Marcy's
despatch of the 28th December, 1855, demanding, among
other things, the recall of Mr. Crampton.
This concludes the correspondence, and we dispose of it
(for the present) with the remark that Mr. Buchanan with-
held the dispatch of the 18th December, a fortnight or
more before delivering it, which really gave Lord Clarendon
no sufficient time to reply by the Atlantic or the Asia.
We understand, however that the 'reply was promised by
Lord Clarendon at an early day.

SUNDAY v.' SABBATH