Windham County Democrat. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1836-1853, 1853-10-05
2. z..,..ss-.,.f ss-Esss.sssz.iEsz=..=.s.
The Koszia Case.

create some excitement IN the world. Austria mas
sent. protest against the conduct of the American
Commander to all the governments of Europe as well
as our own 1t is said that Russia and Prussia have
sirnfed to the government at Washington that they
side with Austria. The latter power, by way of ex-
pressing its approval of the conduct Of the officer who
perpetrated the outrage has promoted him to the
higher honots, and has, will demand satisfaction
of the United States for what it claims to be an in
suit TO its flag The circumstances Of the case are
doubtless fresh in the recollection of the American
people. kosZTA one of the tungarlans who
fled from their native land at the close of the retolu-
tionary struggle, of which KossuTH was at the head.
He came to this country, and took tho preliminary
steps required by our Constitution and laws, to be-
coming citizen, and took the required oath. After
he had taken these steps, he went voyage OF pri-
v.t5 business, as is alleged to Turkey. In pursu-
ance of law of Turkey, which permits any foreigner
to place himself under the protection of any foreign
Consul he may choose, KoszTA, on his arrival at
SMYRNA placed himself under the protection of the
American Consul, having in his possession the au-
ihenticated evidences of the steps he had taken TO be-
come an American citizen. While at Smyrna, an
armed force from an Austrian vessel of war, entered
his domicil forcbly carried him away prisoner, and
confined him in irons on board their vessel. Captain
INoRAHAM, hearing Of the outrage, demanded Kos
zTAs release, which being refused, he cleared his
ship for action and laid her along side of the Ausri-
an vessel and threatened to sink her if the Austrian
commander did not release his prisoner. The matter
was finally adjusted temporarily by placing KoszrA
under the protection of the French Consul until his
case could be finally disposed of These the
leading facts of the case, and the question is Did
Capt INeRAHAM transcend his duties American
officer in his course of conduct towards the Austrian
commander and should he be sustained by his gov
ernmentl
1t will be remembered that the arrest of KoszTA in
a neutral port outrage against the rights and
dignity of Turkey, wholly unauthorized by the laws
of nations, the maxims and rules which are rocog
nized by all the civilized nations Of the world
Smyrna is Turkish port, under the Ottoman Juris-
diction, in which Austria had no more rights. and
could exercise no more authority than she had, or
could exercise in the ports of Liverpool New York
KoszrA was at least under the protection of the Tur
ksh government at the time of his arrest, and being
so the Austrian commander had no power over him
These facts being conceded follows that the nva-
sion of his domicil by an armed Austrian posse, his
arrest and confinement in irons board the Austrian
vessel without the warrant of the government under
whose protection he was, was a gross and wanton
outrage upon him, well upon the Turkish gov
eminent. The Austrian commander had no possible
warrant or authority for his proceedings He was
acting in defiance of every principle of the law of
nations Now, without reference TO the question
whether, as a matter of abstract right, KoszrA was
to be regarded as American citizen and as such
entitled the protection of the American flag. What
was Capt NqRAHAM's duty gallant officer, and
what his power, as commander of an American armed
vessel KoszTA ~as in fact undext The protection of
the American Consul. He was there under the sane
ton of the Government, and according TO the laws
and customs Of the country within whose actual ju-
risdiction he, for the time being was. These facts
open and notorious, and they brought d.
rectly o.Capt. NGRAHAM's notice by the friends of
the man whose rights had been thus wantonly out
ragged. Woo 10 ,eis ti'o slow PiUvves neguti-
alton between two countries four thousand miles apart,
while in the meantime the victim of the outrage, and
in whose behalf appeal had been made, would
surely perish by the sentence Of the Austrian courts
or the equally sure sentence of an Austrian dungeon
We saw, no 1t was his duty as gallant officer
and within the range of his legitimate powers an
American commander, to interpose promptly and at
once 1t was due to the flag which he carried to the
country he represented, and to humanity itself. II
will be remembered, we repeat that the Austrian
commander in the preparation of a wanton and
utterly unauthorized outrage upon defenceess man.
HIS government, therefore. would have no right t.
complain if an English or French commander, any
other stranger had interfered for the protection Of
the outraged victim. There is a principle of law
which is so clearly founded in natural right and JUS
tice, that it is recognized by all governments where
right and Justice in theory prevail, which would
Justify such interference the part of any oneand
that is the law of self defence. Take few familiar
instances ] see incendiary attempting to fire my
neighbors dwelling, assassin stealing upon his
victim; ] find strong beating, without provo
cation, or right, weak one clearly have right
nay it is my duty to interfere to prevent the incen
oirbh
from numbering his victim, or the strong man from
committing wanton outrage upon the weak an
/ the less justified because the outraged were stran
gers to me. Having nterposed in the cases put, anC
compelled the aggressor to relinquish his purpose
who would listen to his complaint or say had dom
wrong in stopping him in his purpose. 1t would b.
no answer TO say that | had interfered in a matte
which did not concern me- Every is concerned
every man is interested, in the prevention of the es
Enlistment of precedent which may at any time b
brought TO bear upon himself, Of which he may b
made the next victim, and when | interfered to pre-
vent the outrages in the cases put, and to defend m
neghbors from outrage, acted indirectly in my ow
defence, and was justified by the great and pervadin
right of self protection.
But in the present instance Capt. INoRAHAM's jus
LITIGATION rests on higher ground. The outraged Kos
zTA was under the protection of the American Consul
He was there by authority of the laws of the countr
in which he was sojourning and when the Austria
commander seized him in contempt of that protection
he committed an outrage against the American flag
against the dignity of the American government
which called for prompt interference on the part
the representatives of that government who chance
to be the spot. 1t was enough for Capt, INGRAHA
to know that KoszrA under the protection of tn
American Consul, and that he had been wrenche
from that protection by authority of, and for
fence against the government within whose jurisdiC