Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1853-10-01

with by a certain hour. Fortunately, however,
| no force was used An arrangement was made
1 by which the prisoner was delivered u the GUS
tody of the French consul general, TO be kept by
MIN until the United States and Austria should
| agree as TO the manner of disposlng of him.
i This full statement Of the facts is deemed i'm
| portant, as il will correct some errors and aid in
| presenting, with more dlstinctness, the questions
| TO be discussed,
the views Of the President upon this transaction,
| aud his reply to these several demands.
His Imperial Majesty demands that the govern
ment of the United States shall direct koszta 10 be
delivered to him. that il shall disavow the conduct
| OF the American agents in this affair call them to
Il severe account, and tender satisfaction proper
| tomato To the outrage.
In order to arrive At just conclusions, it il ne
cessary TO ascertain and clearly define kosztas po
| iitical relation with Austria and with the United
| States when he was seized AT Smyrna. This IL
| 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 ale
glance. by some it is held To be- indestructble
political tie, and though resulting from the mere
accident OF birth, yet forever binding the subject to
the sovereign; by others it is considered poit-
| cal connexon i'll the nature OF a civil contract, dis
soluble by mutual consent but not so at the option
| of either party The sounder and more prevalent
doctrine, however, Is, that the citizen subject,
having faithfully performed the past and present
duties resulting from his relation 10 the sovereign
| power may al any time release himself from the
obligation of allegiance, freely quit the land OF his
birth or adoption, seek through all countries a
| home. and select anywhere that which offers him
| the faircst prospect OF happiness for himself aud
his postcrity. When the sovereign power, where
soevcr il may he placed, does not answer the ends
! for which it is bestowed, when it is not exerted
for the general welfare Of the people, or has be-
sl.s
draw rests on as firm basis. and is similar in
principle to the right which egitimates resistance
| to tyranny.
| The conflicting laws on tho subiec, Of allegiance
| are Of municipal character and have no control
| ing operation beyond the territorial limits of the
| countries enacting them. All uncertainty as well
confusion on this subject is avodedby giving due
consideration to the fact that the parties 10 the
.ion 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 dispute, which occurred within the ju-
ris,cton Of a third Independent power.
| Neither Austrian decrees nor American laws
can be properly invoked for aid or direction in this
case b,t international law furnishes the rules for
Il correct decision and by the light from this source
shed upon the transaction at Smyrna are its true
features to be discerned.
Koszta being beyond the jurisdiction Of Austria,
her laws were entirely imperative in his case, un-
| less the Sultan OF Turkey has consented TO give
| them vigor within his domnions by treaty stipnu
tionS. The law of nations has rules Of its own on
the subject Of allegiance. and disrcgards generally
all restrictions imposed upon it by municipal
| codes. -. >~l
This is rendered most evident by the proceedings
Of independent States in relation to extradition.
| No State can demand from any other, as matter
| Of right the surrender Of native born natural
! ized citizen or subject, emigrant, or even
| fugitive from justice, unless the demand is au-
thorized by express treaty stipulation. lnterna.
tiona law allows such claim, though comfy
.ks h~ll
surrender political offenders (and in this class
Austria places Koszta) is not a duty; but on the
contrary, compliance with such demand would
be considered dshonorable subserviency to a
foreign power and an act merng the reprobation
Of mankind. As rendering needless all further ar
gumcnt on this point, the undersigned will recall
to Mr.. Hulsemanns recollection what took place
in 1919 and 1850 in relation 10 the reclamation OF
| Polish refugees i'll Turkey BY Russia, and OF Hun
gariai refugees (oi whom koszta was one by Aus
tra. THIS demand made concert. as il
we're, by two powerful >overcigns, while their trl-
umphant armies, which had Jnst'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 nations. She might well ap-
prchend for herself the nations Of western Eu-
rope apprchended Tor her, that refusal in her
critical condition would put in jeopardy her exist
cnce 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 right
of extraanon under the law OF nations they at
tempted To strengthen their claim by founding il
| upon the Obligations OF existing treaties-the same,
undoubtedly that arc now urgc, upon the con-
sdcration ofthe United States. Russia and Aus
tra. however, both submitted 10 the refusal, and
never presumed to impne 70 Turkey the act Of
| refusal as breach or violation of their rights.
To show that the very sa.nc claims 10 rights
| now set mp in this were overrulcd and rcpu
dated in 1919 and 1850, the undersigned will refer
TO the cotemporancousv views OF eminent statesmen
A., al.
TO surrender, on the demand Of Austria and Rus
sia the Hungarian and Polish refugees, who were
claimed ~ these powers as rebels aud traitors
| Sir Syat/0rd Cummings the British ambassador
at Consantinope, entirely approved of the Sui
| tans course. on that occasion-indecd, he advised
| IT. In letter to his governments dated the Sd OF
| September. lSi9. he says: "On grounds OF hu
| n,aniiv. NOT unmixed with considerations as at
| irrting the Portes character and future policy l
| have not hesitated 10 advise decided resistance
! 10 the demand Of tXtradion. From another let
,rr Of this ambassador, dated the nth Of Decem-
bcr, commenting on and commencing the cour-
agcous tirmness Of the Sultan in refusing the de.
mand of these powerful emperors for the surren-
der Of these iugitives, on the same pretcnce
now set up by one of them to justify the seizure
| OF ko>zta. this extract is taken:
:" Allow me to add my lord, that in proportion
as admire the courageous frmness with which
the Sultan and his government have determined
| 10 make this stand in the cause OF humanity and
OF the rights Of honor and dignity. against de-
mand alike Objectionable III substance and i'll
form, feel deepening anxiety for the result OF
their resistance. and for the degree of support
which her Ma,csty's government and that OF
| France may find themselves at liberty to afford,
no, only III tho first instance, but in still graver
circumstances, should the present partial rupture
unfortunately assume a more serious and menac-
| ing character.
In these views the French minister resident at
Constantinope fully concurred and SO did the
| British aud French governments; aud both were
prcparedto cspousc the cause OF Turkey. if her
: humane and honorable course in refusing these
uuwarrantablc demands had provoked the resent
ment and brought down upon her the hostilities OF
these mighty potcntates. The opinions OF other
distinguished men, approving Of the decision OF
the emperor of Turkey in refusing TO surrender
the Polish and Hungarian refugees, both on the
ground OF humanity and right. have fallen under
The notice OF the undersigned but he has torborne
| to quote them account Of the unworthy motive
ascrhcd therein to the powers making the demand,
ana III. harsL enfhcfs by yll..h their conduct Is