The Ohio Democrat. [volume] (Canal Dover, Ohio) 1840-1900, 1841-07-15
VOL. 2 NO. 26. WHOLE NO. IS

ted States, he was 10 violate that outright, bY
acting tor the accused, instead of prose cutting
for the United States. From all this
hold tito be clear; that our Attorney Gene
raj has been illegally and improperly employ
ed 10 his business; that all he has done, and all b
the expense that no had incurred, aBd the fee
he may have PROMISED, are not only without
law; and that the rights Of the Stale Of N.
York have not only been invaded and inifins
ged in this interference in criminal trial, but
that the rights and iOlsrests Of lhe owners OF
the Caroline, who have brought civil action
agains, Mcleod for damages for the deslTucs
lion ofther property, have heen also graluit-
ousIy assailed in that part Of tho SecTetary's
instructions in which he declared that such
civil suit cannot be maintained consider
the mission as illegal in itself, aud involving
triple ilIegany, first, as it concerns The Altor-
ney General himself, who was sent to place
where he had 10 right TO go; ns1t, as il con-
Germs the State of New York, as interfering
with her administration oIjuSlice; and, thirdly,
az il concerns the owners of the Caroline, wha
have sued Mcleod for damages, and whose
suit is declared to br Unmaiutana6le.
| now proceed. Mr.. President, to The main.
inquiry ofthe case, the correctness aud Wopri-
ely ofthe answer gwen by our Secretary Of
State TO Mr.. Fox, and its compatibility with
the honor, diguily, and future welfare of THE
Republic. fM
look upon the 'insirQctiOns" which were
giveq 10 Mr., CrteDden, and copy of which
was sent to Mr.. Fox, as being THE ANSWER to
thai Minister; and | deem the letter entitled
an answer; and dated forty days afterwards,
as being mere aflerpiece - an article Gor home
consumption--a speech for Buncombee, as we
say of our addresses 10 our constituents
pleading intended for US, and not for lbe Eng
lish, and wholly designed to excuse and de-.
leud the real answer so long before and SO
promptly gwen. will give some attention TO
this, so called, letter, before | quit tho
case; but for the.present my business Is with
the ''instructi0as," copy of which being deiva
cred To Mr.. Eox, was The ANSWER TO his
DEMAND; and as such was transmitted 10
the British Government, and quoted in the
House of Commons as being entirely satisfac-
ory. Til quotation took place on the 9Th day
o! May, several days before the, so called,
letter of the 9Th cf Ap1itcculd possibly have
reached London. Lord John Russell, 10 an
answer to question from Mr.. Hume, referred
| TO these Instructions as beng satisfactory, aud
| sienced al further inquiry about the ahair, GY
showing that they had they wanisd.
hold these instructions to have betn eTI0~
neons, in point Of nallonal law, derOgstory 10
US in point Of national character, and te0 ling
to the future degradation aud injury Of this
Republic.
| That the Secretary has mistaken the law
of Ihe case 10 conserving to the release Of
Mcleod is persuasively shown BY referring
In fho nj ho iun rs
| 10 january last. Their opinions were them
unanimous in favor Of Mr. Forsyih's answers;
and that answer was peremptory refusal eis
ther 10 admit that Mcleod ought be released.
or TO interfere in his behalf with the courts Of
New York. The reasons urged BY Mr. Fox
in his letter 10 Mr.. Forsyth for making the de-.
manG, were precisely the same wiihihose subt
sequeutly given in the letter to Mr., Webster.
The only difference in the two demands was
in the (ormality Of the latter, being under in-
structions from his Government, and in the
threat which it contsined. In other respects
the two demands were the same go that, at
the outset of this inquiry, we have the opinr
ions of the Secretary of State, the Attorney
General, and the body Of their friends in the
two Houses Of Congress 10 plead against
themselves.
next refer to the arguments which have
been used by my friends who have preceded
me, especially the opening speech Of the Sem
ator from Pennsylvania. Mr.. Buchanan.) and
his pertinent and conclusive quotation from
VatIel. The whole argument was close and
| pointed, and the quotation wac absolutely irrer
! sstt BILE. II was in these words:
"However, es il is impossible for the best
regulated State, or for the most yigilant and
absolute sovereign to model at his pleasure
all the actions of his subjects, and to COM
6ne them on every occasion 10 the most ex-,
act obedience, it would be unjust TO ilnpue
TO the nation or the sovereign every fault
| committed by the citizens. We ought not
| ,han, to say, in general, that we have re-
ceiveJ an injury froms nation, because we
have received il from one Of lie members
| "But if a nation or iis chief approve and Tdti-
fes tho aci of the individual, then becomes
public concern, and the injured party ig
then to consider The nation 90 the real author
of the injury, of which the citizen was, pers
bsps, only the instrument.
"T the offended State has in her p0iDsr Me
Individual OhO has done the injury, she mag
withom Scrupis, bring Aiui to jastice and pun.
ISL HIM If be has escaped, and returned 10
hs country, she ought to apply 10 his soye
eregn 10 have justice done 10 the case"
This 10 the case before Ne. The malelaCs