Plymouth banner. (Plymouth, Marshall County, Ind.) 1852-1855, 1853-10-20


tinople. says:
have had several conversations on
this subject with the Minister Of Forei gn
Affairs and with Ali Pacha. Governor of
Smyrna. a the time the affair took place
These distinguished persons ere very far
from expressing any dissatisfa ction with
the course pursued by US. They sustain
the view the legs ton hsstaken OF thr le-
gal character of the question, and All
Pacha informs me that few years since,
+ the Austrian government refused TO sur
render the Porte, Turkish rebels who had
fed into Austria on the very ground now
taken BY the Porte, namely, that the
treaties did not provide fox the extradi-
tion of political offenders.
Mr.. Brown. the Charge d'Afaires. ad
interim, of the United States at Constan-
/ tinopIe. writes that in an Interview with
/ Chehi Enrndi, also Turkish officer oe
high rank and great experiesce. in which
f the affair Z. Smyrna was discussed, he
observed that 1.-The Austrian government
does not possess ihe power by treaty 10
arrest any one on Ottoman soil for petite
al offences" There is now, however.
something more decisive from Turkey
/ than The opinion Of her public men, in
opposition 10 this treaty claim of Aus
/ tria. The government Of the Porte has
pronounced d judgment in relation 10 the
seizure OF k0szta, which Austria herself
. is bound 10 respect. Ii has proies sted
against The conduct of the Austrian
gents in that affair az uulawfu. and a Vi.
olauon OF its sovereignty, but not one
word of complaint, not murmur of dis
satisfaction, from Turkey, against the
conduct Of the iuncionaries Of the Uni
ted Sta tes at Smyrna. has yet reached this
government This is certainty an anon
eous case: Austria er.aighs the United
States for violating the rights of Turkey
IN The hoszta affair. Turkey. the offend
ed party, exonerstes the United States.
aud PROTESTS against Austria. our accuser.
for the very same offence.
These considerations have led the IN
aersigned. al he believes they lead all
ofhsrs who duly reflect or them, to the
confident conclusion tlst there exists no
treaties between Austria and Turkrv
which could justify Or in any way COIN
tenence the seizure or imprisonment of
hOszta by The Austrian fuactionaries.
But II Austria really has such authei-
" BY treaties she now claims. il con
fessejly extends only 10 Austrian sub
jecss." 1t could not. therefore, be ap-
piled TO koFzta. unless he was such
ubject at the time he was seized. If the
question O his nationality is 10 be set
tied by international law, the only code
which furnishes the rules by which this
question is TO be determined. there is no
good reason for sdjudging him to have
peen. when seized ct Smyrms. Austrian
subject. Bu. settle this question, as Aus.
tria would have i; settled. By an apneal
to her own civil code. the fssui, will be-
/ The same.
( b. the conssn: and procurement Of the
Emperor OF Auatrla. koszta had been
sent Into perpetual banishment. The
Emperor Was party to the expulsion OF
The Hungarian refugees from Turkey
The sovereign by such an act deprives his
subjects 10 whom il is applied Of all their
! rights under his government. He places
/ lhsm where he cannot. If he would, afford
I them protection. BY such an act. ne re
leases the subjects thus banished. from
! the bond OF allegiance. Any other result
would make the political connection be-
tween the subject and the sovereign a
state of unmlligsted vassalage, in which
all the duties and no rights would be on
one side. and all the rights and no duties
would De on the other. hoszta must be
regarded as having been banished BY Aus
tria. for he was one of the Hungarian
refugees whom she procured TO be expell
ed from Turfey in 1851 They were re.
leased from confinement at kutahia. on
cendition OF submitting to perpetual ban
ishment. aud she had two persons pres
enl at their departure who claimed and
Obtained there an active share i'm the ar
rangement." koszta could never, there
after be righ,fully demanded as an Aus
trau subject.
The proposition that KosztD at Smyrna
was not un Austrian subject can be
sustained on another ground. By a de-
cree of the Emperor of Austria on the
gath of March. 1852, Austrian subjects
leaving the domnions OF the Emperor
without permission of the magistrate and
a release of Austrian citizenship, and
with an intention never 10 return, be-
come unlawful emigrants," and lose
all their civil and political rights at home
(Ency. Amer. Tit. Emigration, 2 Rents
Com, so, 5l.)
koszta had left Austria without per
mission, and with the obvious and avow.
ed intention never to return. He was
therefore. within the strict meaning ofthe
imperial decree, IAN unlawful emigrant.'
He had incurred and paid the penalty OF
that offence by the loss of all his civil and
political rights. If he had property. it
had escheated. and he was reduced to
state of worse than absolute alienaee: