The Sun.
London, England, 1860-12-27 00:00:00

7IIR PREACH P.RES ON GAETA.

The following is a creditable instance of the use
made by the French Press of its newly-promised
liberty. It is a protest from the kiecle against the
part played by France at Gaeta :
" Peace is restored to Europe ; on a single point
only a vanquished King, condemned by the voice
of the people, prolongs a useless struggle owing to
the strength of the citadel in which he has taken
refuge, and still more to a generosity which must
now be well nigh exhausted ; it is impossible to
suppose that an attack upon the most vulnerable
part of Gaeta ean any longer be prevented. For
months already the resistance of Francis 11. has
delayed the pacification of the Two Sici-
lies. That Italy should not yet be free from
the Alps to the Adriatic, that her complete
independence should be deferred owing to poli-
tical considerations, is what we can very well
understand •, but here is a country in which the
national will—the basis of our French institutions
—has been unalatakably manifested ; here is a
country in which the agents of the fallen Monarch,
working upon an ignorant and fanatical populace
tion, have not been able to organise a civil war ;
here is a country which is only anxious to realise
political and material improvements, too long
delayed; and in order to secure its happiness, its
nat;onality, and its liberty, and to gratify all its
desires, nothing more is required than the disap-
pearance of affew vessels cruising before Gaeta.
Can France hesitate ? All the less, that she is
bound to give a decided answer to the insolent
reports current in foreign countries. Yesterday we
were told that Russia engaged the French Govern-
ment to continue its protection to Francis 11. To-
day the three Powers which met at Warsaw are
stated to have made the same request conjointly.
Let France show the utter falsity of these rumours.
We also hear of an Austrian project, which would
make the deliverance of Venetia subordinate to the
restoration of Francis IL Would such a scheme
ever have entered the heads of Viennese diploma-
tists if Gaeta had fallen ? "

The Debuts says, on the same subject
" It is because we can only see in the maintenance
of the French squadron before Gaeta an act of per-
sonal kindness, and which we might call one of
politeness, that we wish, in the interests of higher
considerations, to see it brought to an end. It is
only the assistance of France which maintains
King Francis 11. at Gaeta, and it is only his pre-
sence there which still keeps up civil war
in the kingdom of Naples, and excites the hopes of
the enemies of Italy and of France. It is a useless
cause of disturbance, and even of bloodshed. We
think that enough has been done from motives of
consideration for the King, and that humanity
ought not to be exclusive. We have no doubt that
in a very short time the salutary rule of non-inter-
vention will resume its course."

THE SLAVE TRADE.

The complications incidental to a fugitive slave
law are just now most strangely exemplified in a
case pending before the law court of Canada. In
the autumn of last year Mr. Seneca Diggs, a cotton
planter residing in Howard county, Missouri, ob-
served a strange negro walking across his estate.
As a matter of course, he challenged this visitor,
cross•questioned him, and, not being satisfied with
his explanations, proceeded to detain him. The
negro, Anderson by name, accompanied his captor
submissively for a short distance, but as they ap-
proached the planter's house he seized an opportu-
nity, broke away from his enemy, and ran. Mr.
Diggs started instantly in pursuit of the fugitive,
but, though three of his own negroes joined in the
chase, Anderson succeeded for more than an hour in
eluding their gripe. At length, as the runaway was
approaching a fence, the planter overtook him, and
brandishing a stick over his head, called upon him
to surrender: In reply, Anderson drew a large
dirk-knife and threatened death to any one who
touched him. Despising such a menace from the
lips of a slave, Mr. Diggs closed boldly with
the fugitive, who immediately made good his
words by stabbing his assailant to the heart.
The unhappy planter reeled back into the ditch,
and after a brief struggle, " departed," as a New
York paper observes, " for a land where he will
inevitably be convinced of certain facts concerning
niggers which he was fond of denying in his life-
time." Anderson made good his escape, crossed the
Canadian frontier, and commenced a quiet and in-
dustrious career as a free man upon British soil.
A short time ago, however, he was tracked to
his abode by certain emissaries from Missouri, and
claimed, not as a fugitive slave, but as a murderer,
under the provisions of the Ashburton treaty for
the extradition of criminals. By that convention
it is enacted that any person or persons against
whom offences punishable by American law can be
established by Canadian law shall be delivered up
to justice, and the question was whether the act
committed by Anderson could be brought under
such definitions. That Anderson killed Diggs, and
killed him wilfully, was admitted ; but was he
justified in doing so ? Had Diggs a right to arrest
him ? If he had, the killing was murder ; -if he had
not, it was justifiable homicide. According to the
State law of Missouri there was no doubt about the
case. That law enacts that any negro found more
than 20 miles from his master's plantation without
a pass may be arrested and taken back, and it fur-
-1 ther ordains that the captor shall receive for his
1. service a reward of five dollars, besides travelling
expenses proportioned to the mileage. Conse-
quently Diggs was acting legally in apprehending
Anderson, and Anderson illegally in resisting Diggs.
It is perfectly true that the fugitive was defending
his liberty, and perhaps his .life ; but the law of
self-preservation, it was said, could not be pleaded.
A curious case was put by way of parallel. The
law of Canada, like that of England, permits im-
prisonment for debt, whereas certain States of the
American Union recognise no such practice, Sup-
pose therefore that an inmate of a debtor's prison
in Canada should effect his escape by killing his
gaoler, and seek an asylum in one of the States
where incarceration for debt is unknown, would
that State be justified in refusing to surrender the
fugitive ? Would it not rather be compelled to
measure the crime by the usages of the State where
it was committed ? In the same way, were not the
Missouri authorities justified in demanding the sur-
render of an offender who had been guilty of what
by Missouri law was.a murder, however it might
be regarded in Canada ?
These arguments might perhaps have been hard
to answer, but there was a loophole for escape.
The Canadian Courts were bound to respect Ameri-
can law, but were they bound to respect Missouri
law also ? The law under which Diggs attempted
to arrest Anderson was a law enacted for Missouri
exclusively. It was not valid in the Union gene-
rally, and would not be recognised for instance,
in New York or Massachusetts. Now, it is
held that engagements between nations must
be interpreted by national laws. Great Britain
contracts, not with a State of the Union, but with
the Union itself. The British Empire treats with
the United States, not with the State of Missouri.
It recognises federal, but not municipal laws; and,
as Anderson's act was criminal by the latter only,
and not by the former, the argument was alleged
to fail.
This was the position in which the case was left at
the departure of the last mail. The Courts were
exceedingly perplexed with the law, and painfully
embarrassed, we may well presume, by the dilemma
before them. In their hearts and consciences the
Canadian authorities must have felt that Anderson
slew his enemy in defence of all that man holds
dear ; they must have felt that to surrender him.to
his pursuers to be burnt alive—a fate probably
reserved for him—would be a most dreadful
responsibility, and yet, as judges bound to admi-
nister the law uprightly, they may have hardly
seen how to evade the conclusion. We are not
surprised, therefore, to find that they have taken
refuge in indecision, and remitted the case suc-
cessively from one Court to another. First the
magistrates gave up the attempt, and referred
the matter to the Attorney-General; then the Attor-
ney- General, after two months' consideration,

alleged his incompetence; and now the Court of
Queen's Bench has cognisance of the question, by
which tribunal it must finally be decided. Before
this time, indeed, judgment has doubtless been
given, though en whioh side it would be hard to
conjecture.
The tone of the correspondence from Canada pub-
lished in the American journals is very remarkable.
The reporters who transmit from Toronto the ac-
counts of the proceedings are evidently under the
impression that our colonial authorities will do
their duty, whatever pain the act may cost them.
They observe, too, that the Canadians, however sen-
sitive they may be tothe horrorsforceto
of
the
ee
ecxaesceu,
twi
oinl
certainly not oppose
popular
of the law. There will be no rescue. If the sen-
tence goes against Anderson he will be given up,
for people and judges
ali the w w
alike.
Tlhaecorirlelsbpe oondbesenrtvoefdthbyeett; York Tribune
records it as a proof of the "strong love of law
which pervades the community" that a certain ma-
gistrate, presumed to be hostile to the prisoner, has
nat been tarred and feathered, and he cannot con-
clude his letter without suggesting that the unfortu-
nate slave, even, if delivered over to his pursuers,
might be " met" on the borders of the colony by
people less accustomed than the Canadians to respect
the decisions of Courts. There are only four routes,
he observes, practicable at this season of the year
from Canada to the States. Verbum sap. The •
Canadians are full of sympathy. They have sup-
plied the prisoner with necessaries, and with money '
for his defence. They would probably not refuse h