The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-09-30


barbor of Smyrna before this design was executed
The commander OF the ST. Loa 9, from tn ropressn.
toton o. he made to him. felt il 10 be his duty,
as II uDquestionaby was, to inquire into the validity
OF Kosza's claim to American protection. He pro-
ceeced with deliberation and prudence; and ois
covered, what he considered Just grounds Tor iuqui
ring IL to Koszas claim to be discharged on account
OF his American nationality. Daring the pcndenoy
Of this inquiry he received notice Of che design tn
take Koszts clandestireIy, bef re the question at
issue was settled so the dominioss of the Emperor
Of Austria AS there was other evidenceof bad faith
besides the discovered design Of evading the iaquy
Captain Iugrsbam demanded his release, aud init
mated that he should resort to force II the demand
was not complied with by certain hoar. For
tunatey, however, no force was used. An arrange
n'ent WAS made, by which the prisoner vas delivered
to the custody Of the French Consul General to be
kept by him until the United States aud Austria
should agree to the manner Of disposing Of him.
This full st stement Of the facts is deemed impor
tant as 1t will correct some errors and aid in pre-
sentDg with more distinctness tho questions to be
discussed.
The undersigned viii! now proceed to present the
views Of the President upon this transaction, his
reply to these several demands.
His imperial Majesty demands that the govern
ment Of the United States shall direct Koszts to be
delivered to him. th.t it shall disavow the conduct
of the American agents in this affair, call them to
severe account and tender satisfaction pr0p0st0aate
| to the outrage.
In order to arrive at just conclusions it Is necess.-
ry to ascertain aud clearly define Kosztas 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 considers
tic and perhaps the most important in its bear
| il gs upon the merits Of the case
! There is great diversity and much confusion Of
opinion to the nature and obligations Of allegiance.
BY some it is held to be an indestructible political
tie, and though ;utDg from the mere accident OF
BIRTH yet forever binding the subject to che sove.
reign by others it is considered q political COZ
necton in the nature Of civil contract, dissolube
by mutual consent but not at the option Of either
party. The sounder and more prevalent doctrine.
however is, that the citizen subject having faith
fully performed the past and present duties resulting
FROM his relation 10 the sovereign power may 1t any
time release himself from the obligation of allie
glance, freely quit the land Of his birth or adoption,
seek through all countries hOMe. and select any.
WbeIe that which offers hin the airest prospect of
happiness for himself and his posterty. When the
! sovereign power wheresoever it may be placed,
0ses not answer the euds for which it is bestowed
when IT is not exerted for the general welfare Of the
people or has become oppressive tO OindivduaS-thtS
Iighs to withdraw rests on as 6rm basis. and IL
simar in principle to the right which legitimatzes
| resistance TO y ranny.
The conflicting laws on the subject Of allegiance
# municipal character, and have no )ntrolling
operation beyond the territorial limits OF tue
tiles enactine them. All uncertainty as we'll rs con
fusion this subject is avoided by giving due con
sideraon to the act that the parties tO the question
| n
ti0ns and that neither has the right 10 appes to its
own municipal Ia for the rules to settle the matter
in dispute which occurred within the jurisdiction Ot
third Independent power.
Neither Austrian DEGREES nor American laws can
be properly Invoked Tor aid or direction in this csse
but international la furnishes the rules for correct
decision, ard by the light from this shed upon
the transaction at Smyrna are its tr1e features to be
discerned.
Koszta being beyond the jurisdiction OF Austria
her laws were entirely imperative in his case uale
the Sultan of Turkey ha, consented to give them vi
g0r within his domai0ns by treaty stipulati0ns The
law Of nations has rules OF its own on the subject Of
allegiance, and disregards generally all restrictions
imoose6 upon it by municipal codes.
This is rendered most evident by the proceedings
Of Independent States 10 relation to extradOa. No
State can demand from any other, as matter OF
right the surrender OF native-born or naturazed
citizen subject, emigrant, or even q fugitive
from justice unless tue demand is authorized by ex
press treaty stipulation. International law aO Ss no
such claim though comfy may sometimes yield what
right withholds- To surrender political Offer ders
(and in this class Austria places Kossta,) Is not
DUTY; but on the contrary, compliance with such q
demand would be considered dishOn0rable subsei.
viehcy 10 foreign power, and an act meriting the
reprobation Of mankind As rendering need
less all further argument, on this point
the undersigned will recall to Mr.. Halse
manns recollection what took place in lS49 aud
1850, in relation to the reclamation u Polish retu
gees in Turkey by Russia, and of H .ngsrian
refugees, (of whom Koszta was one) by Austria.
This demsnd was made Ia concert, rs it we're, by
two powerful soveregus, while their triumphant sr-
miles, whi n had just put ao 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 vel appreheud for herself II
the nations Of Western Europe xpprehended for her,
that refusal in her critical condition would pat in
jeopardy her existence as an independent pOwer but
she did refuse, and the civilized world justified aud
commended the act. Both Austria and Russ. placed
their respective demands on higher grounds than q
right OF extradition under the Law OF nations; they
attempted to strengthen their claim by founding Il
upon the obligations Of existing treaties-the same
undoubtedly, that urged upon the coosidera-
ton OF the United states. Russia ard Austria ho "
ever both submitted to the refusal; aud never pre-
sumed to impute to Turkey the act Of refusal IS .
breach OF her duty or violation OF their rights.
To show that the very same claims to rights now
set up in this case wee overued and repudlated In
ls49 and 1850 the undersigned xill refer to the Gu
tenporaDe0us views Of eminent statesmen Ia regard
to the conduct of the sultan in refusing to surreu
der, on the demand Of Aust, Ia and Russia. the Hun
earian and Polish refugees who we're claimed by
these powers as re cels and traitors
Sir Stratford Canning, the British ambassador at
Constantbople, entirely approved Of the SULTAN
course on that occasion, indeed, he advised it. Iu
letter 70 bis government, dated the Sd of September
ls49, he says:-"On grounds Of humanity, not un
character and future policy have not heStsted to
advise decoed resistance to the demand of extra
dition" From another letter Of this smbassa Tor,
dated the 18th Of December, commenting on aud
| firm a0fe eha J,Ita
in refusing the demand of those powerful emperors
for The surrender Of these fuetves ON the same pre-
tnce as now yet up by one Of the n to justify the
seizure OF kosta, this extract Is taken -
Allow mo to add my lord, that In proportion Is id
Dh the cou,sgesus hrmnets With Whca the sultan ard
hs eovsrnrsn' have oeterGccd 10 thts stand In
ne esu~s o. humnaiy AID OF the rights Of honor sod
dignity against demand alike In su ,stsncs
sro ia fo m feel dtspnng xtsy for tbs result Of
then and for the degree u which hsr
nsjenys so,efon sDt AID that of Fauos asy and