The Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1852-1853, 1853-10-12

he received notice of the design to take
Koszta c!andestinely, before the question at
issue was settled, into the dominions Of the
Emperor of Austria. AS there was other
evidences of bsd faith besides the discov
cred design of evading the inquiry, Capt
Ingraham demanded his release, and init
ity, and what right has any foreign paper,
for the purpose of making distiction between
them to look behind the character given
mated that he should resort to force if the
demand was pot complied With by certain
hour. Fortunately, however, no force was
used. An arrangement was made by which
the prisoner was delivered to the custody
of the French Consul General, to be kept
by him until the United States and Austria
should agree as to the manner of disposing
of him. ... ... ....
This full statement of the fact is deemed
! important, as it will correct some errors and
aid in presenting with more distinctness the
/ questions to be discussed. .- 60
The undersigned will now proceed to pre-
sent the views of the President upon this
transaction, and his reply to these several
demands. .. ....... ...u ..-
His imperial Majesty demands that the
government of the United States shall di-
rect Koszta to be delivered to him; that it
shall disavow the conduct of the American
agents in this affair, call them to severe
account, and tender satisfaction proportionate
to the outrage. ......
In order to arrive at just conclusions, it
is necessary to ascertain and clearly define
koszta's political relation with Austria and
with the United States when he was seized
at Smyrna. This is the first point which
naturally presents itself for consideration,
and perhaps the most important one in its
bearings upon the merits Of the case.
There is great diversity and much confusion
Of opinion as to the nature and obligations
Of allegiance. BY some it is held to be an
indestructlible political lie, and though re-
suliing from the mere accident of birth, yet
forever binding the subject to the sovereign;
by others it is considered a political connex-
ion in the nature Of a civil contract, disso-
luble by mutual consent, but not SO at the
option VI either party. The sounder and
more prevalent doctrine, however, is that
the citizen or subject, having faithfully per
formed the past and present duties resulting
from his relation TO the sovereign power,
may at any time release himself from the
obligation of allegiance, freely quit the land
his birth OF adoption, seek through all
countries home, and select anywhere that
which offers him the falrest prospect for
happiness for himself and his posterity.-
When the sovereign power, whereeoever it
may be placed, does not answer the ends
for which it is bestowed, when it is not eX-
erted for the general welfare Of the people,
or has become oppressive toindiyiduals, to this
right TO withdraw rests on as firm basis,
and is similar in principle to the right which
Ilegitimates resistance to tyranny.
The conflicting laws on the subject Of al
legiance are of municipal character, ard
have no controlling operation beyond the
territorial limits of the countries enacting
them. All uncertainty as well rs confusion
ON this subject is avoided by giving due
consi leration to the fact that the parties II
the question now under consideration, are
two independent nations, and that neither
has the right to appeal to It's own municipal
laws for the rules TO settle the matter in dis
pute which occurred under the jurisdiction Of
IA third independent power.
Neither Austrian DEGREES nor American
laws Car b. properly invoked for aid or dl-
rection in this case, but international Jaw
furnishes the rules for a correct decision,
and by the light from this source shed upon
the transaction at Smyrna are its tea-
lures to be discerned.
Kosta being beyond the jurisdiction OF
Austria, her laws were ltnely imperative
in his case unless the Sultan of Turkey has
consented to give them vigor within his do
rainioDs by treaty siipulations. The law of
nations has rules of its own on the subject
Of allegiance, and disregads generally all
restrictions imposed upon it by the municip
al code. ., a..t #..-- fos" t.'-,.
This is rendered most evident by the pro-
ceedings of independent States in relation to
extradltion. No state can demand from
another, as a matter of right, the surrender
of native born or naturalized ci,izen or sub
jcct an emigrant, or even a fugitive from
Justice, unless the demand is authorized by
express treaty stipulation. International
law allows no such claim, though community
may sometimes yield what rig withholds.-
TO surrender political offenders (and in this
class Austria places Koszta) is not duty;
but, on the contrary, compliance with such
demand would be considered a dIshonor-
able subseryiency to u foreign po yer, and
an act meriting the Reproduction or mankind.
AS rendering needless all further argume mt
on this point, the undersigned will recall to
Mr.. Hulsemann's reccollecLion what took
place in l849 and 1850 in relation to the
rec amation of Polish refugees in Turkey
by Russia and of the Hungarian refugees
(of whom Kosta was one) by Austria, This
demand was made in concert, as it were, by
two powerful soyereigns while their triumph
ant armies, which had just put an end to
the revolutionary movements IN hungary,
stood upon the borders Of Turkey, with
power to erase her name from the list OF ma
tons. She might well apprehend for her
self, as the nations of Western Europe ap-
pretended for her, that arefusal in her crit
ical condition, would put in jeopardy her
existence as an independent power, but she
did refuse and the civilized world justified
and commended the act, Both Austria and
Russia placed their respective demands on
higher grounds than a right Of extradition
under the laws of nations; they attempted to
strengthen their claim by founding i: upon
the Obligations ofexisting treaties-the same,
undoubtedly of existing treaties--the same,
undoubtedly, that are urged upon the con-