The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1856-06-03


was the result of his interviews with persons who desired
TO manage the affair for their own personal advantages
Any in this country seriously intending % leave Y
have been filter for insane hospital than for warke
camp; here free comfortable and if industrious well paid
and with encouraging future before him there-but
need not say what before him but death The British
government may have been deceived how Mr. Champion
could be with his knowledge of our country is nsompre
hensble To Still ordinary sagacity IN the men at the
head OF military affairs in England ought TO have saved
them from this false movement-ought to have taught
them that this country TO come to recruit for
European armies The expense in proportion TO the sue
cess was enormous, and will hope furnish lesson OF
precauton for the future.
What the operation Of this matter2 No candid
man. looking at the facts disclosed in the Philadelphia
trials and otherwise doubt that the true purper Of
the instructions this Get in the United States,
but do get caught take and avoid any violation
of their laws but the men you must get call them rail-
road laborers and send them TO Halifax under contract
TO enlist there and provide them with their passage This
the plain English Of the matter when Invested of its dip
lomatc garb. No man can look the whole papers
and read them without being satisfied that this is The
British government knew that the proceeding against
laws a similar proceeding would have been against
their own Mr. Champion knew it. OF course we are igno-
of the language of the Instructions but their puport
is sufficiently disclosed by the occurrences.
Do not get caught was the practical injunction But
of the offenders have been caught and repeat that
national character aud standing among the
tons of the world require that Mr. Champion should
home by the act of this government as he has not
been called home as he should have bee by the act OF his
own. ...... a-... .s.. .r.s
Mr. TOOMBS. had not intended by the few words
which uttered simply expression Of my own opin-
on to draw out this debate and evoke the comments OF
the honorable senator from Michigan. am afraid that
the principle upon which the senator from Michigan has
placed this matter is the very which govern
ment has acted 1t is which heartily disapprove Of
The says that could not maintain ourselves be-
fore the nations of the world we made demand on Eng
land when she under the pressure of and then
abandon it when peace was restored.
Mr.. CASS State the whole OF my proposition, II the
Sc .tor peases.
Mr. ToOMBS. will do so or the senator can do it
himself.
Mr. CASS did not say that that was the reason 1
said distinctly that the of her minister had injured
sovereignty and nationality and this is not the
time to give tup
Mr.. TOOMBS. At any rate, the senator inmated that
that might be reason say it is reason which ought
not to operate upon great government like THIS IL
would be very unbecomng for this government to make
demand to allow it to be suspected that it made
demand account of the peculiar position OF England
Such act would be offensive in any nation Above all
of peace between England and France and Russia
have the slightest influence her conduct When the
government of the United States accepted the explanation
of England perfect the other consequences ought to
have flowed from it, am afraid that it has resulted from
idea of what other people might think to main
tenance of national honor. In my judgment there is
safer rule for maintaining national honor 1t is not to
be found in the opinion Of Others but to pursue the
dictated by justice.
Now to the other question: to enlist in this coun-
try admit is against laws but deny that what the
British government did was a violation of them If the
British minister had issued proclamaons and stuck them
this Capitol stating that American citizens who chose
might go Halifax and there be enlisted to take sides for
Russia for England it would not be violation of the
neutrality laws Of the United States. hold to the right
of expatriaon hold to the doctrine of Mr. Webster in
his letter Mr. Husemann. They had perfect right to
go there This whole dispute has been technical argu-
ment about engaging them to 60 to enlist think the
question is too small one to be made matter Of grave
demand between two governments The moment the Brit
ish government discaimed it did from the beginning,
any idea of violating sovereignty territorial rights
government ought not to have gone into matters of
conflicting proof to what had been done by the British
government and British minister When they disclamed
any idea of violating laws interfering with our
sovereign rights the questions in regard to oath at crmi
na-court trials ought not to have been allowed for one
moment make issue with Great Britain. She dis
claimed it did her minister. Whether that disclaimer
true false the national honor satisfied, and
the question ought TO have remained there Such Is my
| Judgment
Mr. PRATT. There Ia one fact which wish to state,
which think has not been alluded TO by othersnamey,
that the letter Of apology the part of the British
eminent is dated after the peace lately established be-
tween the powers of Europe Then, whatever may have
been the state Of affairs at the time when the offence
given, England certainly relieved from all expeota-
ton of difficulty with any European power at the time
when she made this apology which has been admitted by
government to be acceptable. The offence charged
that she attempted to enlist soldiers while engaged
in with government with which at peace
Her government has In letter dated the 30th Of April
since peace has been established in Europe discamed any
intention OF violating the law Of the violation Of which
complain Our government say this Is entirely acceptable
them. concur then, with the senator from Georgia
and others In saying that think It beneath the dig
nifty OF this government to tsrn of the agent Of the
British government who has made similar disclaimer
when the British government itself is relieved from all
sponsibty.
Mr. MASON. Mr.. President II Is the tendency Of the
human mind 10 differ facts they presented-to
draw different differences and different conclusions The
honorable senator from Georgia CONSTITUTES the enlistment
laws in very different from that In which
srue them and In which they have been construed by the
federal courts II s breach Of those laws under
stand them not only to engage persons TO enlist but to
offer inducements for American soil toleave IL and
go foreign soil to enlist in foreign service The
aor from Georgia says he does not understand this be
violation Of law In fact he went far that
II the British minister had up proclamation here on
the Capitol under his name Informing persons in
the United States that II they would go into the adjacent
British dominons they would be enlisted Il would have
constituted no violation Of the neutrality laws take
Issue with the senator from Georgia, but shall go
into the argument understand that the federal court
Mt Philadelphia decided the direct opposite certainly
should have 30 decided II had been in court appre-
bend that when the correspondence Is examined the
will be found TO be substantially these the British minis
ter at Washington undertook 10 eonsrue our laws for
himself and 70 determine what acts he could do and what
acts he could not do In reference them His opinion 10
that what he did did not laws Our courts
have decided that IL did them and govern
ment has decided the fact be that he did violate our
laws he ought not to and he has been dismissed
consequence Of H.
Mr. HAMLlN. Is there any question before the Senate
| The PRESIDING OFFICER The motion for printing
extra numbers Of the correspondence goes the Commit
tee Printing
Mr.. FITZPATRICK. My colleague on the committee
MT JOHNSON and myself have consulted upon the matter,
and the document is of great interest and import
anoe we have agreed to report in favor of printing