The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-11-15
THE pRUssIAN NEUTRALITY LAWS.

THE PRUSSIAN NEUTRALITY LAWS.
We find in the London Times of the 18th ul, the
number in which Is the indecent assault the United
States particular of the trial. conviction, and
sentence of Mr. Curtis the British Cologne charg
ed thhavng accessory the unlawful enlistment
of recruits for the British Foreign Legion in Prussia
1t appears that Mr. Curtis was in the first instance in
diced before the local Cologne and that then the
carried by appeal to the Supreme Court at Ber
lin.
Among other points in the case the question raised
whether consuls entitled to plead any diplomatic in
volatility in such case 1t was expressly ruled that
they And the Times admits that the is the
law in England well in Prussia it is well known
to be in the United States.
The consuls secretary Kray had escaped from the urs-
dicton of the court, and taken refuge in London.
The evidence for the prosecution proved that parties had
applied to the consul and his secretary and had received
from them money for travelling expenses advice route
and reference to recruiting agent at Venloo, in the
Netherlands.
1t observable in the that the principal witnesses
the parties recruited 1t does have
into the head of the Times imagine like its silly
ryman of the Albion in New York. that there any
thing strange out of the way in convicng criminal
upon the testimony of informers and accompces.
1t appears in evidence that the consul acted under in
structons from the British but these nsruc-
tons were not produced the trial. in consequence
was said, OF orders from London.
The main point suggested in defence was that no enlist
had been made in Prussia which, it was alleged
pretended untruy could only take place after the admin
istration of the military oath in England.
II also appeared that Mr. Curtis Prussian subject
but that made difference it being admitted all sides
that English consus in Prussia could plead diplomatic
privilege the charge of infringing the NUM-
cipal law Of the country.
The trial ended in the following sentences.
The that have been proved against defendants
Curtis Enge and Egener do not amount to enistng in the
legal of the word nasmuch that either
in this country yenoo any denitive enlistment took
place. The said defendants are however, guilty of being
accessory to other recruiting agents. The defendants Kray
(the secretary and another must be acquitted the
being sufficiently proved against them Consul Curtis and
with him Engels and Egener are therefore, to be visited
each with three months imprisonment and each the
parties with fine of so thalers."
The writer in the Times admits that there is nothing
to quarrel with in these proceedings concluding only
that perhaps the Prussan authorities might have shown
little consideration for government in the person
Its agent and first of all represented the pressed
for his recall before going the length of subecng him
the scandal Of public prosecution
1t will be perceived how closely this resembles what
has occurred in the United States with certain traits of
difference which deserve attention.
The first point of difference is in the fact that Mr. Curtis
convicted not of recruiting persons engaging them
to recruit but of being accessory before the fact 1t
would from this that tho Prussian law varies from
ours which does not ndct the parties accessories to the
misdameanor but which the legal difficulties of the
by providing in substance that if any person shall
within the territory jurisdiction of the United States en-
list enter himself hire retain another person to en-
list enter himself 90 beyond the limits juisdc
ton Of the United Sales p intent be enlisted entered in
the service of any foreign prince every person SO Offend
ing shall be deemed guilty Of high misdemeanor.
There is another point of difference which still more
interesting. The writer in the Times admits that the
British government had possible fault find in the
case except perhaps that the Prussian authorities might
have shown little consideration to the British gov
ernmen by first demanding the recall of the offending
agent of Great Britain before proceeding legal exrem
ties.
Now understand it, that is just the course which
American has pursued in the very spirit of
consideration and comfy towards Great Britain
The British consul at Cincinnati, Mr. Rowecrof has, il
l3 been lnulcteu, has Dcen The
British consuIs at New York and Philadelphia Mr. Barclay
and Mr.. Mathew, not yet indicted.
Our has prosecuted conviction only some
few of private individuals guilty which it was ne
cessary do in order arrest the continued perpe
aion of crime and to vindicate the offended majesty Of
the laws In regard to the official agents of the British
government it has done just that thing which the Times
indicates the utmost possible claim of international COM
ity public friendshp-namely called on the British
itself for satisfaction and requested that gov
do justice to itself and u.s. in the per-
have deporaby bunged from first to LAST the bad bust
which they undertook Of those shabby errands
which, according TO Sir Walter Scott have sometimes
be performed in the Kings service and which "bung
otherwise cordial relations of Great Britain and the United
States.
And yet while the condu Of the American authorities
in this whole affair has been thus moderate temperate
and above all exception and while the case of the guilty
parties Is thus hanging in suspense between the two gov
not being yet determined whether they shall
be punished by their government for having so adeplora
bly, bunged it's business by own for having under
taken It at athesc very gentlemen feeding British
journal in New York with vtupcaon Of the judicial and
political authorities Of the United States.