The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-02-08
THE CASE OF CAPTAIN GIBSON.

The case of Captain Gibson has attracted
much of the attention of our Government, ant
constituted the staple of many Washington
letters. The correspondence relating to it II
now before the Committee on Foreign Affairs
The Dutch Government stubbornly refuses t.
recognise the justice of his claims, and ou
Administration evidently is willing to have {
pretext for not being very pertinacious in urg
ing. Lately, Mr.. Marcy wrote Q letter to the
President, implying that the Captain had alb
stracted from the correspondence an importan
letter. The following answer to this impu
tation, we understand, has been addressed tt
the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign
Affairs. AS no paper here seems willing t.
allow the Captain fair chance to be heard
we take great pleasure in giving it place IL
our columns:
WAsHrSGroS, d. c., Jan. p, 1855.
To the Honorable Chairman Of the Committee
on Foreign Afairs, FL. Il.
SIR: The appearance of communication
from the Secretary of State to the President
under date of January 10, 1855, and submitted
by the President to Congress on the same day,
drawing upon me the imputation OF having Inn
properly distracted from the files Of the State
Department an important document, in the
suppression of which am supposed to be In
terested, calls upon me to make full state
ment of all / know concerning the existence
the history, and the nature of that letter
The Secretary of State argues to establish q
conclusion, which he strangely omits to state
His argument is, that have had access to the
papers in the State Department, and that no
others likely to abstract the letter have had
such access. The Secretary's logic points to
the inevitable conclusion, but lacks the boldness
to embody it in specific charge.
Deeply as / must regret the necessity fol
meeting an accusation which must inevitably
involve to a painful extent the conduct and
motives either of the accused or the accu
ser, / am not at liberty to waive the issue
Contemplating the official height from which
this severe accusation has been cast at me-
may not indulge in passionate invective but
assured that before the judgment of reason
all men are equal. | am constrained to submit
at that bar my evidences and my conclusions,
with the decency and gravity that becomes the
assertion of what is due to selfrespect.
Although | do not intend that my defence
shall rest upon assertion, but upon proofs, yet
it is nturally expected and proper that should
state the facts Of the case. The first copy that
saw of the letter of the 25th of February was
at the American Legation at the Hague, where
l obtained a copy during last summer. never
saw a copy of this letter at the State Depart,
ment but on one occasion, and then in the
hands of person attached to the Department.
l did not take that copy from the Department.
l know not by whom, if by any one, the letter
was taken from the Depastment; nor can /
give any account of its absence.
propose to establish the assertion that the
imputation alluded to is fairly conveyed by the
Secretary's letter | make no argument.
produce the letter itself:
" To the President ofMe United States:
"After the publication of the correspondence
between the Secretary of State and the Minis
ter of the United States to the Netherlands. in
the case of Walter M. Gibson, called for BY a
resolution of the House of Representatives OF
the 9th of July last, it was discovered that an
important paper embraced in that resolution
had not been transmitted. The paper referred
to was the alleged copy of letter from Walter
NJ. Gibson to the Governor of Netherlands In
dia, dated the 18th February 1852.
q deem it proper to send to you one which
/ believe to be a duplicate of that which was
received at the Department from our Minister
at the Hague, with an explanation Of the rea-
sons why 1t did not accompany my report to
you of the 10th ultimo.
1T is the common practice in the Depart
ment to allow those having claims against for
eign Governments for losses of property or per
sonal injuries, under its management, to have
access to the papers on file in relation to their
respective cases. The ordinary course was pur.
sued in regard to Mr.. Gibson. During the
tendency of the negotiations of his case, down
to the time copies were made for Congress, he
frequently applied for permission to examine
the documents relating to it, and it was always
granted to him. Mr.. Bslmont's despatch OF
the 9Th of March, and the papers which accom-
panied it, were in his possession out of the De
partment for some time. He returned, as was
supposed, all that had been intrusted to him
1t is not known or believed that any of the pa
pers in Mr.. Gibson's case have been in the
hands or under the inspection of any person
but Mr.. Gibson and those employed in the De
partment. One of the documents which &C
companied that despatch was Mr.. Van Halls
note of February Is, 1854, in which he states
that a copy of Mr.. Gibsons letter to the Gov
ernor of Netherlands India 1.-THE missing letter,
was attached and there is no doubt it accom-
panied the copy of that note sent to this De
partment Dy Mr.. belmont
"After the papers were returned, Mr.. Bel
monts despatch was not found among them
but as Mr. Gibson was in Europe, and could
not be called on to account for it, application
was made to Mr.. Belmont for duplicate, which
was obtained from him.
Finding the copy of the letter of Mr.. Glib
son to the Dutch Governor had been omitted
in the documents published by the House Of
ID ooro,ooto+.yns Ill III A.
case have been carefully examined but this
letter is not found on the files of the Depart
ment. 1t is quite certain that it had becom,
detached from the other papers before tn,
copies were made for the purpose of answering
that call. Mr.. Gibson has been questioned il
relation to this paper, and states that it was no
among the correspondence placed in his hand
for examination, and cannot account for its dis
appearance; but expresses confident opinion
that he returned to the Department all the pa
pers he took from it.
"That it was among the papers received from
Mr.. Belmont is certain, for it is distinctly recol
lected by several persons belonging to the De
partment. 1t was regarded as an importan
paper, and much relied on by the Government
of Holland in resisting Mr.. Gibson's claim TO
indemnity. The substance of it, as will be seel
upon examination, is contained in the note O
Mr.. Van Hall to Mr.. Belmont of February 18th
1854, in the printed correspondence. 1t is ais
remarked on in Mr.. Van Halls note to Mr.. Bel
mont of 18th of June, and in our Minister'S re
ply to that note of the 4th of July.
~ have received communication from Mr.
Covers, the Minister of the King of Holland, t,
this Government accompanied by copy o
the letter which the Dutch Government alleQe
was written by Mr.. Gibson to the Governo
of the Netherlands India. 1 read CAREFUL
more than once the copy of that letter, whici
was transmitted by Mr.. Belmont, and do no
doubt that the one which accompanies Mr.
Gevers's note to me is a duplicate of tina
which was on file in the Department, but can
not now be found. The COPY furnished nv tn