Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1855-01-12


sides with the King of Prussia, or with our nAtu
rAlized citizen - and then Mr. Wise can with more
consistency ask the Know-Nothings, whether they
win sustain Mr.. Pierce in his action The Know
Nothings have enough to do at home for the pre-
sent without going to foreign lands 70 correct
evils They have an Augean stable to cleanse here
in our own country In resisting the foreign harp
les that are befouling the seats OF power in Of
facing the serpent trail Of Jesuitsm from the tab
lets Of the constitution and the laws in breasting
the storm Of demagoguism that is sweeping over
the land, and in counteracting the wies OF faction
that threaten the stability of the Union at both
ends of the confederacy. When this task Is nc
complished at home, il will be time enough to look
for adventures abroad.
AS to the duty Of the government in the case OF
this Prussian, TO whom Mr. Wise alludes admit
that as long as he remained within our Jurisdiction
having taken the oath Of allegiance to our coun-
try, he was entitled to our protection. And on
this ground rested his security and the security OF
all others similarly situated who, according to the
English and American law, had contracted this
double, allegiance. As long as they continue on
our soil, any attempt on the part OF the govern
ment Of their native country. to arrest them here,
or TO modest them in any wise, with q view to the
enforcement Of prior allegiance account Of birth,
would involve grave national offence, in the nva-
sion of our coil and jurisdiction, that would cor
tainly be resented. Like the indgnity offered TO
our flag in the impressmcnt Of seaInen, the minor
offence, Of the assertion of allegiance, (f it were
M ofence,) would be entirely. merged in the major
one, Of exercising the claim to search.
This protection extends to criminals even, fee
Ing from justice in foreign country unless there
be treaty with such country providing for extra
dition. But no matter what may be tho extent to
which protection goes, under our law to foreigners,
whether naturalized or NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. to
emigrants or TO refugees for crme--this right to
protection most unqueetionably ceases, when such
foreigner voluntarily returns to the land OF his
BIRTH Not SO, when having enlisted in our service,
whether military naval, ho should be taken as a
prisoner in case Of war. Being Ia the service Of
the country he has virtual pledge of and Is en-
titled to, the protection Of the government. And
although this prior allegiance may exist in theory
70 does the secondary allegiance, az laid down by
the law-writers, too; and the practical application
of the doctrine would result in retaliation, in
Of the punishment Of such persons so taken as
prisoners for treason. A knowledge that such
retaliation would follow, operates practically, to
prevent the execution of such for treason.
Mr. Wise, by way Of attempting to prove that
this right to protection enures to the foreign emf
grant, no matter where he may 60 refers to the
case Of Koszta, and says, in the affair Of Koszta,
how did our blood rush to the rescueS Did the
Know NothDgs side with him and Mr.. Marcy or
with Hulsemann and Austria? If with Koszta,
why2 Let them ask themselves for the rationale,
and'sec II it can, in reason, abide with their Or
der9" Mr.. Wise has certainly mistaken the " ra-
tonale" Of that whole transaction. In the hrSt
place, Rosetta had not been naturalized; and had,
at best, acquired only tho right of domciie the in
definite character Of which, the aw-writers speak
of with doubt and uncertainty. (See Blackstone
and Kent on "domicile.') In the second place, he
had voluntarily left the country. He had no legal
right to claim the protection Of the government of
the United States.
He did not do so, but rather accepted Commander
Jtgrahan's protection, when 1t was rendered. The
public sentiment Of the country, as developed
through the press, and In the debates in Congress-
commended Commander Ingraham's course, land
no one did SO more cordially than myself) more on
the score of humanity and rejoiced at ii more as
an act of galantry and prowess on the part of our
flag, than justified il rs discharge Of duty. Mr..
Marcy in his very able and patriotic letter to Mr.
Hulsemann, did not 30 much attempt to sustain
Ingrahams course strict legal grounds, as to show
that under the peculiar circumstances Of the case,
Ingraham's interference involved no violation OF
our neutral relations with Austria. Koszta was
not on Austrian territory, but in the dominions Of
Turkey. He was not arrested by the Austrian Off
cial authorities under any legal process, but by
Inercenary banditu.
The lea loci the Turkish law Of the place, would
have protected him against such seizure. That
law was disrcgarded, set at naught, annulled for
the time being In the premises, the law OF force,
He was not seized In virtue of any Austrian law |;
for the Austrian law had no efficacy there. I'm
der the circumstances Commander lngraham inter
posed, and think properly. He treated II as a
case where force having usurped the place of all law,
the appeals of humanity were not to be resisted.
He acted Just as he would have DONE and should
have done, II, whilst riding at anchor in harbor
Of the Fee Jee islands, he had snatchcd from the
spit some destined victim of cannibal feast. In
Kosrtas case mere "color OF title" to protec-
ton, growing out OF his domicile in the United
States, was sufficient to justify interference where
q1soad hoe, there was no law in existence.
Besides, Koszta came within the category OF one
Of those cases where, according TO the law Of ma
TONS Austria had forfeited all claim TO his allegiance
He was in exile, outlawed by the Austrian govern
ment; and according to the law Of nations, exile,
whether voluntary or involuntary, TO escape
some punishment, or avoid some calamity" Is one
Of the causes for which q man may renounce the
allegiance be owes his country. (See Voftsf, book
1, chapter 1917 But notwithstanding all this, sup
pose be had been arrested in the Austrian port Of
Trieste where he had voluntarily gone, does any
one suppose Commodore Ingraham, II he had
been there, would have interposedf Hardly. And
ifhe had, would he have been so sustained by pub.
lie opinion here, as he wasf So far from IT. II
would, probably, have ended in an apology to the
Austrian government
have thus far taken up the whole Of this letter
In attempting 70 expose the isnacy OF Mr.. Wisee
prspsises but even admitting, for arguments sake,
that they are trus, and yet his conclusions A.
absurd as are his premises untensbe. Even II our
Revolution had nnnulled the European doctrine Of
despotism, denying the right Of expatriaton; II the
Kings forces had hanged the patriots, under the
pretence Of once q citizen always citizen y even
II the last war had been wsged In defence Of the
right Of foreigners 20 transfer their allegiance 10
thls country; even II the Prussian subject alluded
a. artisad N tho t,rotorfion If this
whilst he n In Prussia even II Koszts was rescued
ia virtue Of the protection which this country owed
HMM the name Of common sense, what has all
this 70 do with the principles Of the KnowNothings
"a argued by Mr.. Wise, viz that, In exercising the
individual right Of suffrage, they have entered into
an organization wherein they pledge themselves TO
each other that they viii not vote for foreigners
Roman Catholics; and that they viii urge change
IN the naturalization laws, by which longer pro.
baton than Eve years shall be required Of aliens
coming TO our country before they are allowed "a
vote themselvess