Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1856-06-03
FRANKLIN PIERCE.
NJ. Nlrcy 10 .W.. DaliaS.

Earl of Clarendon 10 adjust the existing difficulties
and to preserve and strengthen the friendly relations
between the United States and Great Britain. The
vast interest which the Government aud people of
both countries have III uphUidlng and chershng such
relations cannot be more sUlcnnly impressed upon
her Mnjesys Government than it is upon that of the
United States.
The uneqnivocal disclaimer by her AIacsty's GOV.
erlncnt oi amy Intention either TO infringe the law, ar
to Disregard the policy to respect the sovereign
rights ol the United States, and their expression at
regret I'll, contrary To their intentions aud Ia tl.
reiterated directions, there has been any Infringe
nent Of the laws Of the United States" nre satstac
tory 10 the President. The ground of complaint, sn
far as respects her Maestys Government thus re-
moved.
But the President extremely regrets that he cannot
concur III Lord Carcnduns favorable opinion of the
conduct of some of her Mni.stys officers who were.
rs this Government believed, md, after due cunsidc
ration o all which has been offered III their defence,
still believes, implicated in proceedings which were
clearly an Infringement of the laws aud sovereign
rights of this country In respect To such OF these
officers ana agents us hav: 10 CunucXnn with this
Guvernnicn,,u il has nothing to ask from that OF her
Majesty. but the 10 dIilrren; relation IL Mr..
Champion. her Maj-sty's Envoy Extraordinary and
Minister Plenipuentiary 10 this Government, and
the Cuncus of New York, Philadelphia aud Cincinnati.
The President is graed 10 perceive that her Mnj-r
ty's Government would not Hvr heSitaicd 10 COM ply
with the request 10 withdraw these officers from their
official positions, il il hal entertained the views here
taken of their conduct III regard To recruiting con.
rrary to the laws and sovereign rights Of the United
States.
interruption of tho plunatic relHt"ns between this
government and that of Great Britain was antjcpa.
Ted; but. on the contrary the President and il
sincerely DESTROYS TO keep them upon most friendly
fou,ing. Mr.. CraGptnn's withdrawal was asked ful
expressly upon the ground that "his connection with
N iGni IrpIa fnr n,
British service.) has rendered him unaccepta
bic representative oi her Britannia Majesty near the
Government For the same reason the withdraw
al of the three British COnsus was ais" required =
There Officers were, this Government confidently
believes deeply implicated in proceedings contrary
To the law and sovereign rights nf the United States
and contrary. il now appears 10 the intentions and
reiterated instructions ut their own Gnv"rnm.nt-
Il was their personal acts certainly not the less "b
i-c'iunahle for having been done contrary 10 the d
rectiun OF her Mni-sty's Ministers, which rendered
them. in their official characters aud positions, unac
c-p:Ghe To- tiiis G"vernm+nt, anl induced tn" Pr"s
dent for that cause to solicit their recall, believing
that by this course he was contributing To the com
mon Interest aud harmony ot the two Governments
lie has not after III. most mature deiberhti"n, beri
abl. to change his view "f their conduct aud cannot
therefore, change hs purpose i'll relation tn thcIi
Though their conduct related to, and III fact Origi
na;cd diff uity which disturbed the COria harmnn
and good understanding between the two countries
il constituted decided objection TO them of per
sOna character which loses Of ia force by III,
satisfactory adjustment Of that difficulty
The only embarrass ment which attends the case il
the difference of opinion b"tw"ru the two Govern
mems as the completely o these officers III ilega
proceedings within the United States.
In reviewing this subject, III" Pres!den; was dis
posed avail himself of any Reasonable doubts wIici
could be raised in his mind III order TO bring his
opinion in this respect into conformity with that o
her Mnjestys Government; but after careful recon
sderatun ut the case, he has been unable 10 change
th. conclusion to which III had previously arrived.
This difference Of opinion may be, in some degree
ascrbed to the difference in the views OF the two Gov
ernments in respect 10 the neutrality law ana the
sovereign rights of this country. :.
II is not proposed, however, to continue the dis
cussion upon that subject. The conclusions Of the
President, stated in my dispatch of the 18th ot De-
Cenhcr To your predecessor, IN regard 10 the con
struclion of that law and the character mud extent ot
Those rights remain unchanged, and he cannot fprego
the duty ui using all proper means to Sustain and
vindicae them.
The main cause of this difference OF opinion is the
different appreciation vi the proof by winch the char
ges against her Malrstys diplomatic representative
and cOusui+ are sustained.
Lord CIarcndon asks this Government TO reghrd
the hare declarations Of these officers n of sufficient
weight To cUuntervail the evidence against them
Their denias presented III hia dlSpntch "i The 3ot
of April and that ia all winch has been conmunIcn'
ted 10 this Government on the suhject-seem 10 be
sueca and do not traverse all the allegations against
them They deny that they have intringcd our neu
tra;y Inv, by enlistng persons IN the United States
for the British service, or hiring or retaining persons
to leave the United States for the purpose OF beng
enlisted in that service. The charges against them
are much bruader and embrace the offence of viola.
ting the laws aud sovereign rights Of the United States
by setting in operation, within our territory, aud con
ductDg an extensive system nt recruiting. which was
not and could not be carried INTO effect without IN
frupiug our laws and rights; by employing numerous
other
sd.ratious TO leave the United States for the express
nurnose of entering into the British army, and by
ktepiun these agents this employment after It was
we'll known that they were constantly Infringing our
laws
The denial of the implicated officers only covers n
part of the deln uencies imputed to them bat. con-
tninr the excuparnry declaration tn III" simple charge
of having violated the provisions OF our neutrality
act il does not merit the consideration which Lord
Clarendon has ascrbed To it. by adopting Lord
Clur.ndon's construction of our neutrality law con-
,aincd in his note Of the 10th of November, which
renders il almost nugatory and contrary tO that OF
this Government ana of its judicial tribunals, these
officers have not probably found mach embarrnss-
m-nt in meeting the charges with general driiai.
But giving to the declaration ot Mr.. Cranptnn
and the Cnnsus all the consideration which can be
fairly claimed tor it under the circumstances ut the
case il cannot cOuuterbalance the unImpeached aud
we'll sustained evidence which establishes the charges
against these officers of having nirln ed the laws and
Lord Clarendon note tr you ni the 3Oth OF April
conveyo the impression that the evidence by which
these officers ars implicated is derived from one or
two witnesses whose credibiity has been assalied-
This, however, is not correct view of the facts
By the examination Of my Dispatch of the 2Sth Of
December. it will be perceived that these witnesses
were strongly corroboracd, and that there are proofs
wholly independent Of their testimony, abundantly
sufficient to establish the completely of Mr.. Craapton
and the Consus, in the Infringement OF the laws and
sovereign rights nf the United Sa;es. trust VIII
NOT be questioned that it belongs exclusively 10 this
Government aud it's judicial tribunals to give con-
struction to its municipal laws, and 10 determine
what acts done within s jurisdiction are infringe
m.nts of those lava. This is matter which concerns
its internal administration, and il cannot allow the
agents of any foreign power TO conrovert that con-
struction aud Justify their conduct by different in
terpretaton OF our laws, which virtually renders them
ineffective for the purposes intended
The Earl of Clarendon informs you, in his noto OF
the 3Ith of April, that Mr. Champion positively de-
MES the charge Of completely in any of the acts OF
illegal enlistment in the United States and that the
three cousus inculpated do the same. He assumes
that the charge against them is Sustained mainly by
the evidence of two persons, Slrnbel and Hertz,
n hom he conceivcs to be Inwnrhy of credit; md he
onn,als to the American government to accept rs
conclusive the declarations of the minister and con-
suls am instructed TO say thar these considerations
do not relieve the Presidents mind of the unavora-
ble impressions produced by the conduct % those
gentlemen in relation 10 foreign recruitment il the
United States.
It viii be seen, by referring TO my despatch of the
9sth of December, in which the grounds of charge
against Mr. Champion fully stated, that the tcs-
t,mony of Strobel and Hertz was quite secondary,
and an unmporant, part Of the evidence adduced;
the charge being supported Independently of their
testimony, by other witnesses, by original letters OF
Sir. Champion and others, and by undenied and un'
d.r;shl. ncs of Mr.. CHAMPION.
A. TO Strobe aud Hertz however, it may be OBJ
..rved Tint the documents transmitted by Lord Clar-
sudon AZ. proving those persons unworthy o creuI'
entitled to but little weight consisting, "a they do
chiefly of er pase aihdavs, detailing matters mostly