Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1852-1859, 1853-10-05
Important Diplomatic Correspondence
The Koszta Case. aa
Mr.. Marcy to Mr.. isenann,'-(( contiHHed.)

qaTd TO the conduct Of the Sultan IN refusing 10
Surrender, on the demand of Austria and Russia,
Hungarian and Polish refugees who were claimed
by these Powers as rebels aud traitors.
Sir Stafford Corning, the British Ambassador
Mt Constantnople, entirely approved OF the Sul-
.an's course on that occasion; indeed, he ADVISED
If. In letter to his Government, dated the Sd of
September, 1876, he says: "0n grounds oil hnman-
lily, not unmixed with considerations as affecting
the Porte's character and future policy nave not
hesitated to advise deciued resistance 70 inc ue-
mand of extradition,' From another letter.
Ambassador, dated the 18th of December COM
menting on and commencing the courageous firm
ness of the Sultan in refusing the demand oil these
powerful EmperoEs for the surrender OF these tu=
gitiyes on the same pTetence as now set up by one
Of them to Justify the seizure of Koszta, this e2-
tract is taken:
"Allow me 10 add, my lord, that in proportion
as admire the courageous hEmneSs with which
the Sultan and his Government have determined to
make this stand in the cause of humanity and of
the rights of honor and dignity, against demand
alike Objectionable in substance and IN tolm feel
deepening anxiety for the result of their resist
ance, and for the degree of support which her Ma
iesty's Government and that of France may find
themselves at liberty to afford, not only the first
instance, but in still graver circumstances should
the present partial rupture unfortunately assumed
more serious and menacing character"
In these views the French Minister resident at
Constantinople fully concurred, and SO did the
British and French Governments: and both were
prepared to espouse the cuuSe OF Turkey III her hu-
name and honorable course III refusing THESE uLl-
walrantable demands had provoked the resentment
and brought down upon her the hostilites of those
mighty potentnteS. The opinions OF other dishn-
guished men approving of the decision OF the En-
and Hungarian refugees, both on the ground OF hui
manity and right have fallen under the notice OF
the undersigned, but he has forborne to quote them
on account of the unworthy motive ascrlbed there
IN to the Powers making the demand, and 10 Inc
harsh epthets by which their conduct is charao-
terized. =..a-- AK. .a4
1t is an incident of great significance, and bear
ing authoritatiVey upon some oil the most Impor-
tynt questions now raised that the case of kosZta
(for he was one of the Hum arlan refugees then
demanded) was fully discussed IN 1S49, not only
by the parties, but throughout Europe, and deci-
ded against the right of Austria 10 require his eX-
tradition, either under the law oil nations, or by
existing treaty stpulatiOns. This decision deeply
interested not only rulers and statesmen, but the
great body of the people OF every country. They
investigated its merits, admitted It's JuSllce anu
commended the hrmneSS anu humanity OF Tue. oul-
tan for his course.
1t Is to be regretted that this claim for the sur
render of Kosza and his companions, so fully con-
sdered then and so signally oyerruled, should be
again revived by Austria under circumstances
which make the United States reluctant party IN
the controversy The claim has been repudiated
by the general judgment of Europe, and this Gov
eminent is unable to discover any sufficient reo-
n for dissenting from that decision.
Austria appears to have been aware that her
right TO seize Koszta could not be sustained by in
ternational law, and she has attempted to derive 1t
fom certain treaties, "ancient capltulatlonS by
treaty and usage.1' The very slight and inexpli-
cit manner which this authority is adverted to IN
Mr. HulSemann's note apparently indicates, IT not
want of confidence IN 1t, at least desire not 20
have it scrutinized. Ii there really was such an
authority and was of such an eXtraordlnarychar-
acter as it is assumed TO he, itwould have constl-
tued, as Austria must have clearly seen, the main
strength of her case, and she would not have re-
ferred to it i'll such manner as to leave the very
of n 6Ouht OueStiO0. The
paragraph referring 10 II is the following:
.'As there can be no doubt, therefore, concern
ing the question of nationally, the Consul Gene
raj of the Emperor at Smyrna was without doubt
perfecty justified when, in virtue of those treaties
which subject Austrian subjects in Turkey to con-
sular Jurisdiction, he seized the person Of Kosza
within the pale of his jurisdiction"
If there be such ueaties comforting such apow-
en- with such extraordinary means OF enforcing it,
strange indeed it is that more prominence is not
given TO the fact in Alr. Hulsemann's communca-
ton. Why are the detes OF these treaties with
heId2 What IS still more important, why is not
the language conveying this authority quoted?-
The undersigned is constrained, for reasons he will
briefly assign, to question the accuracy OF the in
depreciation which derives the right claimed in the
above paragraph from any existing treaty between
Austria and the Ottoman Porte.
The Austrian InteTnuncio at ConStanhnople,
in conference with Mr.. Mash, the American
Minister resident, spoke OF such right as der-
we'd from "anclent capitulatlonS by treaty and
usage" It is not shown or alleged that new
treaty stipulations since iS49 have been entered
into by Turkey and Austria. The "ancient ca
pituIationS'' relied on 10 support the demand
III that year Tor the surrender oil the Hungarian
refugees; they were ScIutiniZed and no such au-
1hority as IS now claimed was found in them. The
French and English Ministers at Constantnople,
who advised and sustained the Sultan IN resisting
the demand of Austria Tor their eXtradltlon,
would not have given such advice ii they could
have found in existing treaties any authority for
that demand, any obligation on the part of the
Sultan to yield to it. Lord Pamerston, then her
Britannia Majesty's Principal Secretary OF State
for Foreign Affairs, carefully examined these trea-
ties, and expressed his conclusions thereon in
letter 10 Sir Snatford Canning dated oath of Sep
TENDER, 1S49. In this letter, which contained an
extract from one Of these ueateS-that OF Bel
grade-and referred to the claiuS of Austria toun-
ded on them for the surrender Of these refugees,
he says: ''The utmost that could he demanded
would be that they [the refugeesl should not be
allowed to reside permanently IN the Turkish EN-
Pire." -5er
Coming down to a later periodic the very
transaction at Smyrna-abundant reasons are
found for denying that Turkey was then under
any treaty obligation to deliver hoSZta TO Austrln,
or that her Consul General had authority SieZe
him. On this subject is allowable TO resort tothe
declarations of the public men of the Porte as ev-
idence in regard to an issue of this kind. Their
explicit denial may be fairly considered as equiv
nlent to AustriaS affirmation without proof, where
proof, if 1t existed, could be so easily adduced.
In dispatch TO this Government of the 4th of
August, 1858, Mr. Marsh, the American Minister
Resident at ConStantinople, says:
al have had several conversations on this sub
ject with the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Aoli
Pacha, Governor of Smyrna, at the time the af-
fair took place. These distinguished persons are
very far from expressing any dissatisfaction with
the course pursued by US. They sustain the view
the legation has taken of the legal character ofthe
question, and Aali Pacha informs me that few
yeaB since the Austrian Government refused to
surrender to the Porte Turkish rebels who had fled
into Austria, on the very ground now taken by the
Porte namely, that the treaties did not provide
for The extradition, of political offenders -
Mr. Brown, the Charge d'AHaires Gd Interim of
the United States at ConstanIiuOple, writes that
in an interview with Chehil-Efendi, also Tur-
kish officer ofhigh rank and great experience, in
which the affair at Smyrna was discussed, he OBJ