The Sun.
London, England, 1856-07-01 00:00:00

LONDO TIIVENIyi Gs JULT

'.closures implicate you ia _Leese .proceetliage.- --The ieforme-
, tion in his posscssieu does not allow him to doubt thatiyour-
i eel, as well as the Lieutenant-General of Nova Seoti t, and
' several civil and military officers of the British Government,
were instrumental in setting on foot this•s;heme of eniist- •
i
ment, and made :iber 1 provision for funds to be used.as in-
ducements fnr persons residing therein to leave the country
for the purpose of enlisting in the British military service. 1
And, in tele eace to the demand which had been made,
he Rays : i
The object of this note is to ascertain bow far the acts of
known and acknowledged agents of the British Government,
done within the United States, in carrying out this scheme
of recruiting for the British army, have been authorised or
sanctioned by her Majesty's Government.
That was a clear and categoriCal demand which deserved an
unequivocal answer, and it was much to be regretted that
Lord Clarendon, so far from displaying the courtesy due
to the United F.ltates Government, should have written
the letter of the 29th of September, in which he makes
most offensive remarks on that Government, and reflects
on them by insinuating that they themselves had been
guilty of a breach of the international law. Ho says :
Her Majesty's Government feel confident that even the
extraordinary measures which have begin adopted in various
parts of the Union to obtain evidence against her Majesty's
servants or their agents by practices sometimes resorted to
under despotic in titutions, but which are disdained by all
free and enlightened governments, will fail to establish any
well founded charge against her Majesty's servants. The
British Government, is fully aware of the obligations of inter-
national duties, and is no less mindful of those obligations
than is the government of the United States. The observance
of those obligations ought undoubtedly to be reciprocal, and
her Majesty's Government do not impute to the Government
of the United Sates that while claiming an observance of
those obligations by Great-Britain-Ow are lax in enforcing a
respect for those obligations within the Union.
This passage was not less offensive, because it conveyed an
insinuation instead of a direct charge, and it was much to
be regretted that Lord Clarendon should have so far for-
gotten himself as to write a letterof that description in an-
swer to the just demand of the American Government;
and it was that letter which produced all the irritation
and ill feeling which ultimatelyled to the course so deeply
to be regretted. In answer to it Mr. Marcy wrote the
despatch of the 13th of October. After repelling the im-
puted -in contained in Lord Clarendon's latter, he says :
The President would fail in due respect for the national
charcter of the United States, and in his duty to maintain it,
if he did not decline to accept as a satisfaction for the wrongs
complained of, Lord Clarendon's assurance that these official
were enjoined a strict observance of our laws, and that he
does not, believe that any of them have disregarded the in-
junction. This government believes, and has abundant proof
to warrant its belief, that her Britannic Majesty's officers
and agents have transgressed our lawn and disregarded our
rights; and that its solemn duty requires that it should vindi-
cate b, VI by insisting upon a proper satisfaction. The Pre-
sident indulges the hope that this demand for redress will be
deemed reasonable and be acceded to by her Britannic Ma-
jesty's Government. This government has indicated the
satisfaction which it believes it has a rig-t to claim from the
British Government in my despatch to you of the 15th of July
last. _
That despatch was not delivered to Lord Clarendon until
the 2d of November, and he has since asserted that Mr.
Buchanan withheld it because he considered that the de-
spatch of the 11th of July was a perfectly satisfactory set-
tlement of the dispute. A controversy arose on this subject
in consequence of the statement made in that house by the
noble lord at the head of the Government. Much corre-
spondence took place, but it was immaterial to the main
question before them. The original demands of the Ame-
rican Government were much less than they afterwards
became. On the 15th of July Mr. Marcy wrote to Mr.
Buchanan : -
The President instructs you to say to her Majesty's Govern-
ment that he expects it will take prompt and effective mea-
sures to arrest their proceedings, and to discharge from
service those persons now in it who were enlisted within the
United States, or who left the United States under contracts
made here to enter and serve as soldiers in the British army.
Lord Clarendon says that before this letter was received
orders had been sent out to atop all recruiting; but in his
letter of the 16th November he justifies his whole pro-
ceedings, and contends that he had a right to do everything
he has done. Ho says:
It appears to her Majesty's Government that,, provided
me'y that no actual " recruiting" (that is, enlisting or hiring)
takes place within the United States, British officers who,
within the United States' territories, might point out the
routes which intending recruits should follow, or explain to
them the terms upon which they would be accepted, or pub-
lish and proclaim such terms, or even defray their travelling
expenses, or do similar acts, could not be justly charged with
violating such sovereign territorial rights.
The despatch concludes in a most extraordinary manner :
It only remains for me to state that no enlistment in the
British service is valid without attestation, and that accord-
ing t 3 British law a recruit cannot be attested in a foreign
country, nor even in the British colonies, without a specially
delegated authority for that purpose, No binding contract
could, therefore, be made with any man within the United
States ; promises might be so made, but any money given:to
men to enable them to repair to places beyond the United
States' territory for the purpose of being enlisted would be
advanced at a Ask. Nevertheless, if it can be shown that
there are persons now in the foreign legion who have been en-
listed or hired in violation of the United States' law, as well
as of the British law, her,Majesty's Government will be pre-
pared to offer them their discharge, and to give them a free
passage back to the United States, if they choose to return
thither.
Let the house observe Lord Clarendon's view of what this
country had a right to do in the United States—a right
which he deliberately maintained. Mr. Marcy might very
well say : " Although you have put a stop to recruiting,
you have laid down a principle, which you reserve for
future occasions, which we must deal with." Lord Claren-
don says there can be no enlistment without atteetatien,
and ne attestation can take place in a foreign country,
bat we are ready to discharge any persons you can show' to
have Been enlisted in violation of the United States laW—
but according to it, no person could be enlisted in the
United States even if he wished to be, and it was, there-
fore, perfectly illusory of him to make the offer in satisfac-
tion of the demand of the American Government. It Was
only just, howeier, to Lord 'Clarendon, that in his de-
spatch to Mr. Dallas he complained that he had been niis-
un lerstoed. He says :--
The reference made to British law was merely intended to
indicate that if persons had been enlisted under the ciream-
,stances supposed, such enlistment would have been at vari-
ance with British as well as with American law; but the Un-
dersigned did not mean that respect would not be paid; iu
the discharge of men, to the principles cf the law of the
United States alone, should that law appear to have been
-violated in a single case. •
Ile (Sir F. Thesiger) put it to the house whether anything
could he more illusory than this course, when the United
States made a demand for satisfaction. ;• or could anything
be more natural than that, when their demand for ex-
tremely moderate satisfaction was refugee, they should
rise in their demands far above what we considered stilfi-
cient in the letter of December, 1855? The American Go-
vernment, in the course of proceedings, found themselves
compelled to demand the withdrawal of ttr. Crampton; as
stated in the June despatch. 'se (Sir F. Thesiger) put it
to the house whether the course adopted by Lord(Cla'rebtlim,
first in writing au offensive letter in answer to the clues-
tion whether the acts of the agents were sanctionediby
the Government, followed by a bold assertion of a right
which.could not be allowed by the American Government
without compromising their independence, and his re-
fusal of the moderate satisfaction demanded had not
driven the American Government ioto a position where
it was necessary to take some step to vindicate their
Sovereign rights? Lord Clarendon, however, had still' an
opportunity of preventing the last indignity put on this
couutry. He might have admitted that his refusal \V as
not justified, and , have withdrawn the minister and re-
moved the consuls, at the same time, if he believed them
to have been faithful servants, giving them employment
elsewhere. Unfortunately he adopted, a different course.
In his despatch of the 33th he says : .
. That Mr. CraniptoU positively and distinctly denies the
charge brought against him ; he declarei that be never hired
or retained, or engaged a single person wi hin the United
States for the service of her Majesty, and that he never coin]:
w
tenanced or encouraged any violative of thela of the United
'itates., . ' He cannot but express the earnest hOPe of tier
Majesty's di vernnierii that these explanations and assuraniees •
may prove satisfactory to the Government, of the United
States, and effectually remove any ruisaPpiehonsion which
may have hitherto' existed.
The house would observe that Lord Clarendon distinctly
ree gni•ed and sanctioned every act of Mr. Crampton, and
decl cored none of his acts were illegal; sand at the tineelm
wrote this despatch he was fully informed of the partiem-
tars of those acts, for he had all the correspondence. of
February and March, 1855, bet keen Mr. Crampton and
his agents before him. In the month of May he was im-
ported to have said, " That her IL jesty'S Government had
hesitatedin dealing with an agent who could hive so far
forgotten bis duty and violated his instructions as to have
riolited the Ia tv-of the United States, but to throw otef
end censure their agents when they were convinced they
had done nothing of the kind would be shabby and dis•
honourable." On the 27th of May the American Govern-
ment wrote :--

The uacquivocal disclaimer of her Majesty's Government
of any intention either to infringe the law or disregard the
policy, or not respect the sovereign rights of the United
States," and their expressions of regret—' if, contrary to
their intentions, and to their reiterated directions, there has
been infringement of the laws of the United States,' are satis-
factory to the President. The ground of complaint, so far
a% respects her Majesty's Government, is thus removed But
the President extremely regrets that he cannotvoncur.in Lord
Clarendon's favourable opinion of the conduct of some of her
Majesty's officers who were, as this Government believed,
and, after due consideration of all which has been offered in
their defence, still believes, implicated in proceedings which
were so &early au infringement of the laws and sovereign
rights of this country.

Lord Clarendon knew perfectly' well that these officers had
acted with the sanction of their. Government from begin-
ning to end. In the month of May he considered it would
he shabby and dishonourable to sacrifice them, yet he al-
lowed the American Government to remove them without
a remonstrance. The manly, straightforward, and honour-
able course for him to have adopted was to have said,
" These agents have but faithfully discharged their duty ;
they have not disobeyed instructions. Do not visit it upon
them ; for whatever has happened the Government is re-
sponsible, and visit it on them." But what. did. Lord Cla-
rendon sly? He (Sir F. Thesiger) wouid read his answer.
He says :
" Her Majesty's Government retain the high opinion which
they have ever held of the zeal, ability, and integrity of Mr.
Crampton ; and of the earnest desire by which he has been
animated to avoid all just cause of offence to the Government
to which he was accredited. Her Majesty's Government can-
not but believe that on many Material points in respect to his
conduct the President has been misled by erroneous informa-
tion, and by the testimony of witnesses undeserving of belief.
But in the p• esent case' her Majesty's Government are bound
to accept the formal and repeated declaration's of the Presi-
dont'of his belief that these officers of her Majesty have vio-
lated the laws of the Union, and are ou that account unac-
ceptable organs of communication with the Government and
authorities of the United States; and her Majesty's Govern-
ment cannot deny to the Government of the United States a
right similar to that which, in a parallel case, they would
claim for themselves—the right, namely, of forming their own (
judgment as to the bearing of the laws of the Union upon
transactions which have taken place within the Union."
- - - What was thfs-b at to sacrifice these-jaiidomen 11 Lord Cla-
rendon himself had fitly characterised such conduct, and
that in terms which he (Sir V. Thesiger) would be loth to
use. He was not in the slightest degree apprehensive that
this discussion would produce any irritation or keep alive
a gill-feeliagin the American Government. On thecoutrary
the people of the United States will learn that the House
of Commons do not concur in the principles put forward
by Lord Clarendon, and the effect of this discussion will be
to tranquillise the u,in is of the people; and so far from
being detrimental to the interests of this country cannot

but-be" pro:luetive of the beat results. (Hear.) Wets
the United States right in -the course which they ha 1
parsit el or no L ? Th;4 entirely dependiel on the pre toe
whether the English '4-x/emu-nit were justified in. the
clandestine and secret scheme which they set on foot and
carried ot. for the purpose of evading the neutrality laws
of the United States. If the GoYerntnent were not justi-
tied
in thatethen, of course. the dismissal of their Minister
was perfectly right on the part of the American G,:vern-
ment, and we must submit, to the indignity which we had
received in consequence of the acts of our Government, for
no one could doubt tket it was a hunibation and a degra-
dation to be obliged Co submit to the insult cf the dismis-
sal of our Minister, and to confess that the American Go-
vernment were justified in what they had done. (Cheers.)
Nothing could be more calculated to degrade this country
in the eyes of foreign states. He was very much struck
with a passage which he had found in a French newspaper
which showed the opinion that was entertained of the con-
duct of this country in France—an opinion which, no
doubt, pervaded the whole cf the continent, and which
-would unhappily attach te the British name and character.
The passage to which he referred was as follows :—" It is
far from our intention to blame the prudence, the circum-
spection, and even the humility of the Government and
statesmen of England, which are commanded in the name
of such great interests; but,' nevertheless we will permit
ourselves to remark that the spectacle offered by the Bri-
tish Administration by no means corresponds with the idea
we had formed of aegreat country. This moaeration, Oil
patience pushed to the limits of abnegation in the presence
.of a cool and premeditated insult, this desertion of an agent
who was declare I up the last moment worthy of responsi-
bility, this facility of viewing matters in their best light,
astonishes us; but, after all, the honour at stake is not our
owe, and it is not for us to take Wunder our protection.
(Opposition cheers.) Were they not forcibly reminded by
these expressions of the language of the great Lord Chat-
ham, "But yesterday and England might have stood against
the world, now none so poor as to do her reverence ?" And
who had brought them to this condition? Why, her Ma-
jt.sty's Government. Could we then hesitate to vote for
the motion of the hon. member for Mayo, declaring that
their conduct was not such as to entitle them to the ap-
probatioe of that house?
Mr J. PRILLIMORE hoped the result of the motion
would strengthen the hands of the Government. °His hon.
and learned friend (Sir F. Thesiger) asked wore they dis-
posed to submit to the insult of the dismissal of their Am-
bassador? but he (Mr. Phillirnore) maintained most dis-
tinctly that any State had, according to the law of nations,
a right to demand the recall of an amoassador. When
Charles 11. came te this country after the Restoration,
altheugh he was on the most frienaly terms with the French
Monarch, he immediately demanded the recall of the French
Ambassador, and he was receded immediately. If their
ambassador had given offence to a foreign nation, and that
11 foreign nation demanded his recall, were they to be driven
to the alternative of going to war or sending another am-
bassador ? It was most important for the house to bear in
mind that the law of the United States did not resemble
the Engli-h law. The policy of the United States permitted
any subject of the Sta es to take service under a foreign
Power; there were several people in the United States
who joined in the war and took service in the British army
froth the beat and highest motives ; there were also several
victims of Russia, and was there any harm in telling them
that, if they chose to go to Halifax, they might enlist in
the British army? With regard to the conduct of the
Earl of Clarendon, he (Mr. Phillimore) said that from the
beginning to the end of the blue book there wart but one
directipn given, and that was—" Take care not to offend
the law of the United. States." (Hear.) Ho (Mr. Philli-
more) said, if the law had been transgressed, a high-spirited
an' generous nation. ought to be content with the despatch
of the Earl of Clarendon to Mr. Buchanan, in which the
noble earl stated that to avoid any infringement of the law
of the United States, her Majesty's Government had deter-
mined that all proceedings with regard to enlistment
should be put an end to. He said it would be more con-
sistent with the true dignity and honour of a gr eat nation
to accept that apology as frankly as it was offered. Sup•
posing no offence to the national honour of America were
intended, and the President fully acquitted the English
Government of any such intention, was there anything iu
the history of America to lead one to suppose that she
would be so sensitive upon this subject? When he com-
pared the conduct of America in reference to us with our
conduct to other nations, he was forcibly reminded of a
passage in " Junius," in which, speaking of the Dnke of
Grafton, he said the conduct of that person reminded him
of the conduct of a prude, who prosecuted one lever for a
rape, while she solieited the advances of another.
Mr. H. BAILLIE said the Attorney-General was per-
fectly correct in saying that, in deference to the opinion of
man* hon. gentlemen with whom he generally acted, he had
withdrawn the motion on the American question, of which
he had given notice. He (Mr. }Lillie) had no reason to
complain of the course taken by the hon. member for Mayo;
he no doubt believed that the time had arrived when it
was impossible for Parliament, without failing in its duty,
any longer to maintain silence on this question, and that
they were bound to give to it that consideration which its
vast importance imperatively demanded. It was impos-
sible to deny that it was a question in which the honour
and character of the country were involved. Whatever
might be their differences of opinion, either with respect
to the origin of the war in which they had unfortunately
been engaged, or with regard to the manner in which it
had been conducted, they were all equally prepared to
maintain and vindicate the honour of their country. That
honour had been compromised, not indeed by her Majesty's
envoy in Washington, because the Ministers of the Crown
thought fit to maintain and declare that he had been dis-
missed 'without reason and cause —that he had committed
no offence, and violated no law. Well, if all those facts
were tine, then, indeed, an outrageous insult had been
Offered to the people of this country, which the Gevern-
went bad'failed in a proper manner to resent. (Elder,
hear.) In discussing this question they must go to itslorigio.
They were often told that the war had been popular
throughout the country, and that a martial spirit had ge-
nerally prevailed among the people. It that be 'rue, they
had aright to ask how the Ministers had been unable to
till up the ranks of the army, or to raise the necessary
number of men to carry ou the war. They had a right to
ask why the Ministers bad felt it necessary to employ agents
to seduce the citizens of foreign states from their allegianCe
in order to engage them in the service of her Majesty, con-
trary to the wishes of their gevernment and the laws of
their country.- These were important questions, worthy the
serious consideration of the house. He was not one who
opposed thraForeign Enlistment Bill. Whatever objections
he entertained to that measure he thought it was desirable
at the commencement of the war to give full and ample
powers to the Executive Government, but he certainly did
not anticipate that they would abuse those powers. He
never for a moment supposed that any Government would
bring forward a foreign onliitment bill unless they had
tiactaained by previous inquiry or negotiation whether
permission cbuld be obtained to enlist men in those coun-
Wel-, in which it was intended to raise foreign legions.
Sat & a praCtice had been adopted in modern times by
Etifopean tations—by the French Government. when they
wanted to raise Swiss legions, and also by the Neapolitan
and the Roman Governments, by both of whom it was well
known'that Swiss legions had ben engage I It had re-
meineil for the Ministers of the Queen of E-gland to set all
-decency atalefianee—to outrage the law which regulated
the conduct of other modern European States, an ! to insult
foreign nations in a manner which had called forth the just
rebuke of the Government of the United States, and it
would he fortunate for the people of this country if this
conduct did not lead to still more disastrous results. It
also appeared to him that the Government friled iu their
duty at the commencement of the war in failing to im-
press on the minds of the people of this country that if
they wished the war to be carried on with vigour, they.
ought to bo prepared to-submit to all the evils :Ind incon-
venience which a state of war of necessity entailed on ci-
vilised nations; and it was bocense the First _Minister of
the Crown shrank from the unpopularity which he knew
would attene the enforcement of that principle that he
was compelled to resort to a course which lowered the cha-
racter and compromised the honour of the nation. He
could not conceive that a greater insult could be offered to
any nation :than attempting to seduce its subjects from
their allegiance in order that they might engage in the ser-
vice of a Powee Which was fighting against a country with
which that:nal-len was friendly. 'Rey were teld: thst the
'English Government were misled by the language held by
Mr. Buchabane the-American Minister; but he had de-
rded that ho had given any tricourfreernent to the Govern-
ment to adopt the course they did. (Divide.) Suppose
that before Mr. Buchanan was made aware of the senti-
ments of his Government upon the subject of the Ruisian
war, he had expressed his own opinion to be that the great
mass of the people of the United states woul I take a deep
interest in the success of the Western Powers, who had
come forward to resist an unjust aggression, and to main-
tain the independenc3 of Europe—suppose that to have
been the case, it would only have shown a mistake on the
pot of Mr. Bechanon.• But there never was any mistake
as to the sentimen is of the American Government, because
seven days after the declaration of ' war they made thr.t
communication to Mr. Crampton which had been alma y
read to the house, in which they told him that the course
which the Government intended to pur-ue .vasone if strict
neutrality, and that they would not tolerate any vi Wien
or breach of that neutrality by either of the coutesding na-
tions.' But of whit had Mr. Crampton been guilty? He
was accused of having given his sanction to the employ-
m -nt of agents by officer, of the American Government,
for the purpose of seducing the citizens of the United
States from their allegiance, and of engaging them in the
service of her Majesty. Before he (Mr. Baillie) entered
into pr eefs in support of that charge, he desired to come to
a clear understanding of the nature of the offence. Great
confusion of ideas prevailed upon the subjel. The offence
was described, boob by the Minister of Foreign Affairs,
and the noble lord at the head of the Government, as a
breach of some municipal law of the United Sates; where-
as, if-the offence charged had been committed, it was a
direct violation of the law of nations. So it hail beta
always held by the great constitutional writers who had
hitherto been regarded a, high authorities upon questions
of international law. The Attorney-General had referred
to Vrittel, but he seemed to consider him as a writer whese
authority was not much esteemed. 1 attel says, " The
man who undertakes to enlist soldiers for foreign countries
without their Sovereign's permission, or who entices away
the subjects of another State, violates one of the most
sacred rights of nations. This crime is distirguished by
the name of kidnapping or man stealing. and it is punished
with the utmost severity in every well-regulated St te.
Foreign enlisters are hanged without mercy, and with the
greatest justice. (A laugh.) It is not presumed that their
Government evenld order them to commit a crime ; but
even if they receive each an order, they ought not to obey
it, for they ought not to do anything contrary to the law
of nations. With respect to such of them as practise
seduction only, it is generally thought sufficient to punish
them when caught; but if they use violence, it is usual to
claim theieshrrender, and the giving up of the persons
whom they-have carried off. If it is done by the orders of
their Sovereign, it is a sufficient cause for declaring wr r."
Such was the description of the offence and punishment as
given by Vatted. But the American Government had fur-
ui- hed them with a variety of authorities of great eminence
both in Germany and France. Hubner, a learned Ger-
man, laid it down—" A State entirely neutral has a right
to exact, even by force if necessary, that the belligerents
do not use their neutral powers for the purposes of war;
that they do not gee together ammunition, or other re-
quirements of war; and that they do not make aoy mili-
tery preparations, or any enrolment or collection of ;amps."
The Abbate Galliani, the great Neapolitan jurist, and M.
Ilautefenille, a French jurist, laid down the same princi-
ple. He would give the authority of a statesman whore
opinion he well knew would be respected by the noble porn
at the head of the Governments—he alluded to Mr. C- n-
ning. Upon a motion made in April, 1823, by Lord Al-
thorp for the repeal of the Foreign Enlistment Act, which
was supported by the noble lord the member for the City
of London, and opposed by Mr. Canning, the Secretary of
State for Forum Affairs, Mr. Canning sai,l—" WI at I
now cell upon the house to do is to adopt the same emus
which has been recommended to neutral powers upou tor-

trier occasions. If I wished for a guide in the system of
neutrality, I should take that laid down by America in
the days of the Presidency of Washington, and the Secre-
taryshio of Jefferson. In 1793, during thel French war,
complaints were made against America that vessels were
being fitted nut in her ports, in opposition to the laws of
neutrality. Immediately upon this representation, the
American Goverurneet held that such a fitting out was
coetrary to the relations existing between that country
and Great Britain, anti orders were issued prohibiting the
arming of auy vessels. That is the principle upon which
we ought to act." He (Mr.- Baillie) could only regret that
these principles were no lodger maintained by his (Mr.
Canning's) successor in office and friend. That Mr. Can-
ning might have gone further, and said that, upon the
demands of the President of the united States, the
French Minister, who was engaged in those proceedings,
was immediately recalled by the French Government..
Sir Williani Scott, a great lawyer and statesman, bad
said, "There can be no solecism more injurious in itself,
or more mischievous in its consequences, than that the
subjects of any State shoal have a right to act amica-
bly or hostilely to other countries." That was opposed
to the principles laid down by the noble lord,
who had stated in that house that the subjects of the
United States had a right to leave their country and enter
into the service of foreign nations. " Clvitas non career
est" were the words of the noble lord. The spirit, if not
the letter, of the Act of Congress was opposed to any vio-
lation of the neutrality laws. He would now proceed to
consider the charge made by the President of the United
States against the Government of this country. When
making his speech to Congress, the President said that the
enlistment was carried on upon a preconcerted plan—that
rendezvous were opened oa the frontier and in the cities of
the Uaioe, and that the elitirtrifirsiness was couduc'ed by
a corps of British officers—some in the North American
colonies, and others iu the United States. The facts were
proved on the trial of Hertz; but before he (Mr. Baillie)
entered upon the consideration of them ho would briefly
abuile to the etetement made by the noble lord at the head
of the Government, in answer to a question put by the
hon. member for the West Riding, whose absence, and the
cause of it, he sincerely deplored. The noble lord on that
occasion said it was true that some violation of the muni •
cipal law of the United States might have taken place, but
that as soon as it was brought under the notice of the Go•
vernment the recruiting was put an end towand that a
suitable apology had been made, which was accepted by
the American Minister, who stated that he had no doubt
it would be also acceptable to the Government whose re-
presentative he was.. Now, the'noble lord had misled the
house by this statement, as, in reality, no. apology had
been rendered for the principal complaint, which was that
our Minister had violated the laws of. the United States.
The noble lord, so far from making an apology, had inti-
mated that the British Minister had done nothing wrong,
and that, the charge against him had been supported by
perjured witnesses. It was true that on the 16th July the
Earl of Clarendon bad written to Mr. Marcy to say that we
bad violated no law of the States, but that, if we had, we
were sorry fur it; but Mr. Buchanan at that time was not
aware of the charges that had been brought against Mr.
Crampton. Mi. Marcy said that when the recruiting
was first commenced it was carried on openly—that
houses were opened at Philadelphia and at New York
to receive recruits—that advertisements were inserted
in the newspapers, headed with the royal arms, and
that every possible means was taken to carry out the obe
ject in view. This reaturally excited the attention of the
American Ministc4, who went to Mr. Crampton to ascer-
tain whether he' had received the sanction of his Govern-
ment for his proceedings. Mr. Crampton replied that he
had not, although it' was proVed at the trial of Hertz that
he had opened an office at Philadelphia for the enlistment
of recruits, and tb ,t Mr. Crampton had written to him to
come over to him to Washington, as he wished to get sonic
information from him. • Atter Hertz had been arrested,
tried, and convicted, lie made a. confession, in which he
declared that he had acted as the agent for Mr. Howe,
with the full approval and sanction of Mr. Crampton. He
' argued that Mr. Crampton not only had full knowledge of
the acts of Hertz, but knew that those acts were illegal,
and therefore it was that instead of transmitting the wormy
direct to Hertz, he eent it round through Mr. Howe. He
quite admitted that Mr. Crampton never retained any one
in the United States for her Majesty's service ; and more,
he a twitted that every time be saw Hertz he might have
told him to take care and not violate the law. The other
person engaged in those operations was Strobel. It was
published in all the newspapers how that person entered
Halifax with music at the head of his troops. But vigo-
rous application of the United States law quickly put an
end to tees° measures. The recruiting office was closed,
awl Mr. Crampton set off, at the end of May, for Halifax.
The first friend he called on their was his friend Strobel.
So much might be learned from the letter of Lieutenant
Preston. Strobel afterwards stated that then it was that
a new plan of operations was drawn up, with Via approv• 1
of Hr. Crampton, who wrote out instructions for the car-
rying of it out. Now, whether those instructions pointed
to a violatim or an evasion of the law of the United
States, they were equally a breach of that good faith
which, as her Majesty's envoy, he was bound to observe.
Now, so far from this course being the wayward impulse
of two or three Canadians, why, it was the very line which
was deliberately pursued by her Majesty's Government
towards the nations of Europe—towards Prussia, Swit-
zerland, awl the 'Tense Towns. Remonstrances were ad-
dressed by those Powers to the Government of this coun-
try, but the First Minister bad refused to communicate
these to the house, arid, thelefere, they could only con-
jecture that they contained whit was injurious to the cha-
racter of this country. Her Majesty's Government, with
the leave of the Emperor of the French, established a
depot within two miles-of the town of Basle, and offered
every encouragement for the desertion of the Swiss sol-
diers. The consequence was, that in a single night the sol-
diers at the outposts in Basle would desert to the English
depot. Such conduct as that which was pursued by the
English agent: was declared to be felony by the Prussi an
code. The British consul at Cologne was arrested for a
violation of the Prussian law of enlistment, and in answer
to the charge put in two pleas. The first was the general
plea, " not guilty," and the second, that he was acting
under the authority of her Majesty's Government ; and on
this latter plea the King of Prussia pardoned him his
offence. The other night he (Hr. Baillie) inquired of the
Government if any correspondence had taken place between
the Foreign-office and the authorities of the Hansa Tarsiers
relative to the imprisonment of five or six agents of the
British Government, confined there for an infringement of
the neutralitylaws, and he received an answer which did
' indeed surprise him. He was told that no such correspon-
' deuce had taken place, and from that answer was to' be
gathered the way in which groat men treat the tools they
employ for illegal purposes. Now, what he wanted to know
Was, why a different course was pursued with reference to
Prussia, Switzerland, and the Hanes Fowns, to that in re-
ference to the United States of Atiserica. All last winter,
down to the very last day of the war, our ships were in the
Elbe, despite the remonstrances of Prussia and the Hanse
Towns, employed in transportingtheir subjects who enlisted
in the Foreign Legion to Heligoland. Was the house to un-
derstand by this that it was the palicy of our Foreign-office
to be humble and submissive to powerful naval States, and
to treat with contempt the remonstrances of such States as
had no naval force. (Hear) No doubt that had been the
policy of the Foreign-office while it had been under the
superintendence of the noble lord at the head of her Me-
jesty's Government. They all recollected how humble
and submissive be had been to Russia in relation to the
capture of the Vixen, the annihilation of the Republic of
Cracow, and violation of the treaty of Vienna, and how
active be had been at the same time in interineddling
Spain, Portugal, and Ample;. It now appeared that
cur foreign policy was still tainted with the same odious
and contemptible spirit, In considering this matter,
however, there were two points worthy of conside-
ration. The first was, if the proper means had been
adopted to maintain the efficiency of our army during the
last war ; and, se mndly, if any necessity had arisen to
juseify the course pursued in raising foreign troops? Ili
1813. when the population of this country was only
1:3,000,030, we maintained a much larger army in a state '
of effi lieocy than was voted for the 'late war, and yet the
population had increased to 23,000,000. Iu tiwe of war,
the only means of recruiting the army was to maintain
the militia force. In 1813,-the militia force raised by
ballot was 415,210 men, and the regular army 270,422
men. During tb• late war the militia was only between
40,000 and 50,000 men. The gallant general, the member
for Westminster, put a very pertinent question to her
aldeety's Government. He asked what had become of
our army? Parliament had. voted 212,000 men; there
wore about 60,000 at Balaklava, and he supposed tha rest.
were doing the duty of policemen in the colonies. Now,'
he (Hr. Blithe) could tell the gallant general that they
were not employed as policemen in the colonies, for, the
army was from 40,030 to 50,003enen less than Parliament
had voted. Now, it would be admitted on all hands that
the Tact of the army being kept in a full state of efficiency
would be in time of war the main spring of the Govern-
ment; but her Majesty's Ministers, instead of acknow-
ledging that, thought that a lavish and profuse expenditure
on foreign troops was all that was required of them—au
expenditure so lavish and profuse was never known in
what were called the clays of rampant Toryism, es the
noble lord at the head'Of the Gf'Overnment, who was then
Secretary of War, knew well. Now, the army of the
East, of which the noble lord all last session boasted so .
much, was made up of six different nations; and he (Mr.
Baillie) might be told that such was the natural result of
the system of voluntary enlistment, and that the people of
this country were too independent to submit to a conscrip-
tion ; but the hon. gentleman who used that argument
seemed to be unaware that in the United States, where
the people were considered as independent as in this
country, the army was maintained by conscription. The
position of England had been changed by th t application
of steam to the purposes of war, and if we were not pre-
pared to adopt some system of defence different to that
which had before existed, we must give up all hope for
the future destiny of England

Sir G. GREY said that he would occupy bat a shot t
period of time in the observations which he was about to
address to the house. Tt was difficult to ascertain what was
the precise nature of the charge which was brought against
her Majesty's Government. The bon. gentleman who
brought this motion forward showed but too clearly that
the great object which he bad in view was to disparage the
character of the Earl of Clarendon, her Majesty's Secre-
tary of State for Foreign Affairs—a character which stood
too highly in the opinion of Europe to be affected either by
the sarcasm or invective of the hon. member for Mayo.
(Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned member for Stamford
(Sir F. Thesivr) seemed to have pointed his shaft against
her Majesty's Government, because thee had suffered an
indignity to be cast on this country by the removal of Mr.
Crampton, without its having been resented by the le-
moval of Mr. Dallas. The hon. and learned gentleman
said that he had read the despatch recently addressed by
the Earl of Clarendon to Mr. Dallas, and he said that her
Majesty's Government had stooped to an indignity which
compromised the dignity of the country. Bat the hon.
gentleman (Mr. Baillie) bad taken a totally, different
uound. His attack upon the Government, and lly
; or the Goverment which had preceded it, was in equa
re pt--
once to the policy of the Foreign Enlistment Ac-. T e
hon. gentleman had deliveted a speech which he (Sir G.
Grey) was not sure he had not delivered with great force
and effect when the measure was before the house. (Hear,
hear, and a laugh) He had laid down, as a princi-
ple of international law, that no subject of a nenttal
state could enter lath the service of a state which was .at
war. • He said that the maxim --civitas non career ed, was
not ttue' and that the United States would not periit
their subjects to enlist in foreign service. Was that the
doctrine of the United States? What did Mr. Mercy 13
on the subject of those persons who had left the United
States 'to give their assistanc t to Nicaragua? He said The right of expatriation is not to be withheld from the
6M-zees of any free state. The liberty to go wh re hopes
of better fortune entice them belongs to freemen, and no
frce Government can oppose it. It is no complaint against
the neutrality of this country that persons have left it a' id
have afterwards been found in the ranks of a belligerent
army." The Prtsident' in his message. s "that, in the
i a'ed state of:Nicaragua and Costa Rica, one of the
conteu4 tin -facticks* invited the co- perati,,n of a small
body of citizens froru California, by whose assistance tran•

quillity wire • speedily restored within those territories."
The law on the subject had been very chiefly laid down
by his hem. nevi learned friend the Attorney-General,
namely, that the citizens of the United States had a right
to leave their country with the avowed object of taking
service with a foreign Power, provide I that they were
not hired within the territory of the United Stetee. With
regard to the Foreign Enlistment Act, the hon. gentleman
(Mr. Beillie) had referred to the state of the British army
in the year 1,13, and to the amount of the mill is force
then embodied, to show that in the war with 'tussla the
employment of foreign soldiers was not necessary. But
the honourable gentleman had overlooked this impor-
tant fact, that it was at the beginning of a war that
the difficulty of raising troops was chiefly felt. The Bri-
tish Government had thought it necessary to raise foreign
troops, but they had resorted to no new method—they ha I
thought that they might invite the set vices of men whose
sympathies were favourable to this country. He (Sir G.
Grey) thought that the Foreign Enlistment Act had been
founded on sound policy, and therefore it became the
duty of the Government to carry into effect the intent.ou
with which that act hail been passed. The hon. member
for Mayo said that the first step
.was taken by the despatch
of the Colonial Secretary to Sir G. Le Marchaat in July,
1855. The first step was that many persons-iu the United
States, British subjects, German -and Scl
' eswie-Hol-
steiuers had tendered their services to the British Govern-
ment. Under these circumstances, did the hon. gentle-
man say that the Colonial Secretary was not justified in
writing that despaech? The Government was noxious
that nothing should be done to violate either the
sovereign rights or the municipal laws of the United
States. The Government acted iu that spirit, and believ-
ing that these British officers had acted in the same spirit,
it would have been base on their part to have recalled
these men when they hail only acted acccordiug to the
letter and spirit of the instructions which they hadreceived.
Mr. Crampton communicated to the Government of the
United States the offers made by persons resident there to
take service in her Majesty's army, awl he also communi-
cetel those freer to Mr. Marcy. Mr. Crampton made no
e mr•rltnent whatever of the offers which were made, and
if he did not enter minutely into all the arrangements, he
was impressed with the conviction that the United States
were not anxious minutely to inquire into what was going
on. That was the spirit in whee Mr. Crampton acted, and
when criticisms were *lllVie on single passages In the de-
spatches, or in the fact of that gentleman having.been in
communication with persons whose character was of a most
disreputable kind, they should not overlook the generous
spirit exhibited by the Earl of Clarendon, and the gene-
rous spirit- in which Mr. Crampton acted throughout the
whole of these transactions. There were persons in the
United States, who professed to act upon the authority
which they had received few her Majesty's Govern vent,
or from Mr. Crampton—who were doing acts tending to
interfere with the amicable relations of the two nations,
and who it was impossible strictly to defend; and it was
on these grounds that her Majesty's Government avowed
their determination to put an end altogheher to this scheme
for enlisting troops. It had been denied that any apology
.was offered by the Government when these facts came to
their knowledge. What wet e the facts of the case? The
apology, which was said to be no apology, was one which
did, indeed, say that nothing had been done by persons
acting under the authority of her Majesty's Government to
give any just cause of complaint to the United States, but
it expressed our regret that their laws, if infringed, should
have been infringed by persons without.any authority,
and stated that such infringement Was entirely contrary to
the wishes and the positive instructions of her Majesty's
Government. It was of course impossible to admitin that
apology that things had been done contrary to the laws of
the Uuited States because nothing was proved • but they
admitted the fact might have been so, and if so they deeply
regretted it. (Hear.) The apology concluded by setting
forth that her Majesty's Government, having reason to
think that no precautionary measures would effectually
guard against an iufringemeet of the law, were determined
that all proceedings for thoenlistment of recruits should be
put an end to, and instructions fur th tt purpose were sent
out before her Majesty's Government had the honour of
receiving Mr. Buchanan's note. A good deal had been said
as to the effect of that despatch upou Mr. Buchan in ; but
what were the facts of the case? Mr. Buchanan, to whom
it was addressed, certainly made a very short answer, for
he did not enter into any argument to show that-the course
pursued gave no satisfaction to the United States, but he
s tid he would have much satisfaction in transmitting a
copy of the Earl of Clarendou's note to the American Se
cretary of State. Mr. Buchanan was evidently satisfied
with the explanations given by her Majesty's Government,
and in the decision they ha .t come to to abandon their pro-
ceedings. (Hear.) A despatch, written in ignorance of
the despatch of Mr. Buchanan, by Mr. Marcy, insisting ou
certain terms of satisfaction, it was not thought necessary
by the former gentleman- to transmit to the Earl of
Clarendon, because he felt that the despatch sent by the
British Goveretneet, of the ldth of July, was likely to
terminate the whole affair by showing the spirit in which
the English Government had received the remonstrances
of the United States. (Hear) He thought the passages
to which he had referred clearly showed that the impres-
sion on Mr. Buchanan'. mind was that the despatch in
question ought to terminate the a hole matter, and be
concurred with her Majesty's Government that the conci-
liatory course they ha f adopted, rut of deference to the
feelings of the United States, would be entirely satisfac-
tory to the latter Government. (Hear, hear.) He thought
the house would consider that the course pursued by the
Government showed an earnest desire to do nothing which
would be at all likely to place them in the wrong, iu case
these affairs should unfortunately not be brought to a sa-
tisfactory conclusion. The hon. gentleman s aid that the
evidence given at the trial showed that Mr. Crampton had
been in communication with Strobel and Hertz. No
doubt he had been, but in tetal ignorance of their ch e.
racier, which was alto wholly unknown to her Majesty's
Government, and he (Sir G. Grey) did not think that the
house could condemn the Government because, in pursuit
of a legitimate object, they had employed those men, and
that the house would allow the evidence of men of such
infamous character as these were proved to be—denied, as
it was, by Mr. Crampton and the consuls—to have any
influence upou the decision of the house. The hon. mem-
ber for Stamford, from one of the despetches of the Earl
of Clarendon which he had. read to the house, assumed
that the Bill of Clarendon asserted that the British Go-
vernment insisted upon the right of both enlisting and at-
testing recruits ou the United States territory, to serve in
the British army. But that despatch did not bear that in-
terpretation ; for the Earl of Clerendon was there only an-
swering a charge of Mr. Marcy's and showing that it was
impossible, by the law of E gland, that, having regard to
the terms of the dernandsof Mr. Marcy, any person could have
been so enlisted ; but the Earl of Clarendon further added
that if any one had been enlisted contrary to the law of the
United States he would send him back again to America.
He (Sir G. Grey) did not believe that any one had been so
enlisted, and the demand was thereto; e impossible to comply
with. He urged the house to be guided in their opinions
by the' general character of the correspondence and pro-
ceedings, and to say whether they were satisfied that the
-Government had not, in all respects, in what they had done,
regarded the municipal law of the United States—a lea
which even the American Government itself now confessed
the Government of Great Britain.had nrt infringe I. Were
the house prepared to condemn the Geyer lenient becausewhen
teey thought there might be ground for a shadow of con
plaint if they persisted iu the course they had adopted with
reference to enlistment, they Stopped, at great disadvantaues
te themselves, all further probe° iinge iu the Uuited States,
and because they had not thought rght, upon the dismissal
of the British Minister, to retaliate by the dismissal of Mr.
'Dallas, against whom this country had no complaint, and
through whom the American Government was ready •to
continue negotiation upon. pressing • matters of great im-
portance? He was sure that the house and the country,
upon a full consideration of all the circumstances of the
case, would come to the conclusion that the Government,
in the measures it had adopted, had consulted'the honour,
'the dignity, and the interests of the nation at large.
(Hear.)
Sir F. THESIGER, explained that he had not complained
of the-Government for not retaliating upon the American
Government by sen dug back Mr. Dallas, but that what he
had complained of was -that the Government had placed
the country in such a position as to compel it to submit to
the indignity which had been offered to it.
'Sir J. WALSH n:loved the a journment of the debate.
Lord PALMERSTON expressed a hope that the debate
would be brought to a close that evening.
- The house then divided, 'when there appeared—
' • For the adjournment of the debate
Against it... 220
Majority for the Government —llO
The announcement of the numbers was received with
loud cheering.
Sir J. WALSH then rose to speak upon the original
motion. He thought the exultation of hon, members was
misplaced. The opinions of many of the leading members
of the house had not yet been ascertained. The noble lord
at the head of the Government had not yet addressed the
house, and 12 o'clock was rather a late hour, under such
circumstances, to proceed witifit debate on so important a
subject. He Irect no politibal sympathies with the bon.
gentleman who brought forward this motion. He felt that
the honour of the country hail been placed in a delicate
position—(a laugh)—the question before the house really
being ma hether the Government had sustained our national
dignity, and whether it had not received detriment at
their bands. It appeared to him that the American Go-
vernment might have Written and asked her Majesty's Go-
vernment to recall their Minister; but, unless based upon
sufficient grounds, the dismissal must have been an offen-
sive one, either towards the Minister or towards the na-
tion which he represented. The Gm ernment had acquiesced
in this proceeding of the American Government by not.
dismissing Mr. Dallas ; bat he was not prepared to say
that they were not right in that course. Their justifica-
tion for not oismissing him was, however, that they were
in the wrong, and that was the only defence they could
make. (11,ar.) The complaint of the President was that
there had been a systematic evasion of the United States
law, and that her Majesty's Government had not acted in
th'tt spirit which one friendly Government ought to act
towards another. He felt himself forced to vote for the
motion of the hon. member for Mayo,. because he consi •
tiered that this country had, is some respects, been humi-
liated. If Mr. Dallas had been dismissed, the house could
not have interfered with the dispute, but as the Govern-
ment had not dismissed him they acknowledged they were
in the wrong, and therefore he should votefor the motion.
Mr. M. GIBSON then moved that 'the debate be ad-
journed.

Lord I'ALMERSTON said if these motions for adjourn-
ment were repeated at that time of night (half-past 2
o'clock) the result was clear that the debate must be ad-
jowl ed.

_ _ •
The debate was then adjourned till 6 o'clock to-morrow
(this day), and the motion that the Speaker leave the
chair was withdrawn.
THE GRAND JURY ASSESiIitENTS BILL.
Certain additional clauses were agreed to, and
Mr. FORTESUUE proposed to insert the following
clause after clause 3—" In making such appointment, this
treasurer shall omit therefrom every tenement consisting
wholly or in part of a dwelling-house, the total annual
valus.tion of which tenement, as set forth in such final list,
or in such revised valuation as aforesaid, shall not exceed
the sum of four pounds."
. _

After a shoit discussion, the house divided, when the
numbers were--

For the amendment
Against it lO9
Majority against it
• Mr. BLAND (in the absence of 31r. M'Aitthon) moved,
after clause 11, to it Bert the following clause Notwith-
standing anything contained in the act of the 7th year of
King William IV., chap. 11g, it shall not be nnessa,ry for
the high constables or cess collector to enter into fresh secu-
rities at each assizes, provided that the bond and warrant of
attorney to be executed by him and bis sureties, as by the
said act required, be conditioned for his duly collecting and'
paying to the treasurer of the county, on or before the fit e'•
day of each assizes, from time to time, so long as he shall
continue Sigh constable or collector, whether by his then
present or any future appointment, all such public money
as he is or shall be required by such treasurer to collect : 1
Provided always, that it shall be lawful for the grand
jury, at each assizes, if they in their discretion think fit,

BIRTHS.
Or & SON.

...
'fi On the 26th ult., at Priory Houses, Hastings, the wor
of J. 1.,,n1ia11, Esq.
On the 26th ult., at Portledge, North Devon, the wit./
of Cuptain H. J. Curteis.

COP • DAIJORTXR.
On the Sth ult., at Eatou-square, Viscountess ALAMO'
On the 26th ult., at Edmonton, the wife of E. Mack
murdo, Esq.