Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1841-06-25
rw ENTY-sEyENrn coNGREss--lst Session

And each day he far happier and brighter than the past -
Oak Grove, Chesterfield co.. Jnne' isii. +. :. W.
rwENTY-SEvENTH CoNGRESs--Ist Session.
IN SENATE-Ihursday, jane 10.
THE CASE OF Mcleod.
The question before the Senate being the motion o'
Mr. Rves to refer SO much of the Presidents Message
as relates TO our foreign afairs 10 the Committee on
Foreign Affairs, and Mr.. Buchanan having concluded
his remarks on the subject, published in Tuesday
paper
Mr.. RlVES rose in reply, and commenced BY OBJ
serving that as member Of the Committee Foreign
Relations, it fiji and necessary that he should oter
some remarks the subject which had thus been
urged on the notice ofthe Senate Nothing could pre-.
striking example OF the tendency OF all sub
iecs discussed public bodies to assume party
character than the remarks of the honorable Senator
from Pennsylvania (Alr. Buchanan) which had just
been submitted to the Senate. The gentleman had
commenced by disclamer-most honestly uttered,
MIR. r. had no doubt-of the influence OF any thing
like party feelings in what he should say; and yet ne
had hardly entered upon the threshold OF his SUBJECT
when the labitual and unconscious bias OF party
man. as the Senator frankly avowed himself to be,
exhibited itself in too uneQuivocai TO be mis-
taken.
All who have had occasion TO treat our legislative
halls questions such that now presented to the no.
flee of the Senate must have felt how difficult il often
is to reconcile the impulses OF an American spirit win
the measure and which might seem to be due
10 the natural susceptbilitIes Of foreign Powers In
the taken Dy the nOHOTFUle SeHtieldH VI
grayated character of the outrage perperated IN te
destruction of the "Carollne, Mr.. H. SAID he hearth
" concurred. The gentleman had not uttered word
in reprobaon of that transaction to which his heart
and his Judgment did not respond But the very terms
in which the Senator denounced and the
aggression made il national wrong, to be redressed by
national means and not TO be avenged by visiting the
responsibilities Of this public offence on the head OF
such an instrument Alexander Mcleod, If, indeed,
he were at all actor in the scene, there every
reason to believe he was not.
Mr. Rives said he should endeavcr in the outset, 10
recall the discussion its merts-o the question
of international law which the Senator from Pennsyl-
vania had adverted only in the close of his remaks
lie should place it in the foreground of the argument,
because by only can the conduct OF the Adnnistra
,ion in the particular in which il is impugned,
be fairly tried and Judged. He would not go back 10
recapituate the history of the controversy respecting
The destruction of the Caroline further than TO show
the new position which the question assumed mmedi-
aiey upon the accession Of the present Administration
10 power
This unwarrantahe outrage, involving violation OF
the national sovereignty territory, well as
the destruction of the lives and property Of American
citizens, committed in December, 1877, and
aroused general feeling of Indignation throughout
the Union. Our minister ut London, under the in
strucons Of the Government here addressed, in May
1888 representation to the British Government on
the subject TO obtain "dSaro,ral and dlsappToua OF
the act and also sLch redress the nature OF the case
required" Notwithstanding the enormlty OF the out
rage as painted in this very communication Of our
minister at London, drawn up in conformity to instruc
lions from Washington, the late Administration,
the Senator's political friends, in whom he thinks
there acant Of energy in prosecuting the d
mand for redress, actually slept over this national
injury from May, 1888, TO March, ls4l, when they
went out Of power And SO profound was their SUM
her that, in late debate in the House of Commons,
the British Secretary of State for Colonial Affairs
(.ord John RusselD stated that the complaint of the
American Government was, for long period, consi-
dered dropped. II is true that Mr. Stevenson, who
could not but feel the awkward contrast between the
lofty tone of his communication Lord Pamerston in
May, lS'S, and the patient acquescence which follow
ed the long continued silence of the British Govern
ment did, July, 1889, write TO Mr.. Forsyth TO know
if he should the subject with Lord Palmerston
and if So the degree of urgency he should adopt To
which Mr.. Forsyth replied no; "the President expects
from the TONE of Mr.. Fox's CONVERSATIONS, that the
British Government will answer your application in the
case, WITHOUT MUCH FURTHER DELAY But, IN point
of fact, no given by the British Govern.
ment down to the period of the late Administration
exit from power.
All this while then, the destruction of the "Caro-
line stood unexplained and unarosced by the British
Government, and there was nothing OF conclusive
nature to determine, whether it TO be viewed as
authorized act Of individual the public act OF
the British authorities. In this state of things, Nc
Leod in November last, came into The State Of New
York. and having from his idle, and, is uni
of having been guilty and conspicuous actor in the
destruction of the Caroline, he arrested and in
dicted upon charge OF murder and arson. Mr.. Fox,
on the 18th of December, demanded of the Govern
ment of the u S. the Liberation of Mcleod, on the
ground "that the destruction of the steamboat Caro-
line is we'll known have been public act of persons
her Majesty serrce, obeyng the order Of their suPe
rior authorities. The demand refused, because
the Government Of the u. s. had right TO interfere
with the judicial tribunals of New York, which had
ban IF tha nd IN fha do
caraton Of Mr. Fox, MIR. Forsyth slated that f the
destruction Of the Caroline public act of persons
in her Majesty service, obeying the order of their
perior authorities the fact has not been before
nicated to the Government of the u s by person au
thorized to make the admissions and It will be for the
court which has taken cognzance OF the offence with
which Mcleod is charged to decide upon its validity,
when legally established before it Mr. Fox, recurring
to the same subject in his letter TO Mr. Forsyth Of The
goth Dec 1S40 stated that "he was not authorised TO
pronounce the decision Of her Majesty Government
upon the remonstrance which had been addressed 10
j, by the u S. against the act in question.
Thus stood the question at the accession of the pre-
Administration The destruction of the Caroline
had not yet been arOced By the British Government
as public and authorised act. But on the l2h OF
March, eight days after The Inauguration Of President
Harrison, Mr. Fox addressed letter to Mr.. Webster,
Secretary of State, informing him that he then
instructed by his Government TO state that "the trans.
action, (the destruction Of the Caroline within the
territorial limits Of the U. So 'on account of which
Mcleod was arrested, was transaction of public
character, planned and executed by persons duly en-
powered by her Majesty colonial authorities TO take
any steps and to do any acts which might be necessary
for the defence of her Mnesys territories, and for the
protection of her Majesty subjects; and consequent
iy, that those subjects Of her Majesty who engaged in
that transaction performing an act Of public duty
for which they cannot be made personally and ndivl
dualy answerabe to the laws and tribunals Of any TO-
reign country" Upon these grounds he was instruct
ed 10 demand again from the Government of the u 5
the immediate release of Alexander Mcleod.
This communication of the British minister gave
new aspect to the subject and presented for the con.
.ideration of the American Cabinet grave question,