New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-05-18
RESPONSIBILITY FOR DYNAMITE.

American responsibility for dynamite out
RACES is discussed temperately and judicionsly
in the current number of The North american
Rerier. Professor Henry Wade Rogers, the
writer of the leading article, approaches the sub
icct in commeudabe spirit of fairness, coneed-
inc mt the ontset that Irish Home Rule is IN
honorable and a just cause, with when the
American people naturally sympathizc. This
cause he is careful not to confouud with the
barbarous and inhuman agencies of assassina-
ton and dynamite, and hence he can discuss
without prejudice Or partsanshlp the question
whether the United States authorities are under
any obligation to interfere in the dynamite
campaign.
Professor Rogers takes up the English pre-
cedents beginning with the Orsin case. The
arrangements for that plot were made IN
London, and the bombs were purchased III
Birmingham by an Englshman. At one time
and another associations have existed III
London for the purpose of supplying men and
money in aid of revolutionary plots; but this
fact affords no reason why New-lork should
be permitted to become a store house for the
@politcal incendiarism of foreign States Even
if Orsinis confederate went unpunshed, ana
London has often been the headquarters OF
plots against other States, stheIo are several
English presidents which Americans are bound
TO consider. During the Civil War Mr.. Seward
complained of the alleged manufacture OF
"Greck fire" Mt Windsor Canada tO.be used
by Confederate emissaries in attempts to
burn American cities. The British Govern
ment acted upon this complaint and the Cana
dian authorities adopted measures to prevent
l. # 10
paItment salso directed the attention OF the
British authorities to the plot for lntrO
ducing yellow fever into Northern cities by
means of infected clothing, and Dr. Black
burn WAS arrested by Canadian officials. The
evidence against him, however, was so weak
that the charges could not be pressed. In each
case the British Government took active meas
ures to repress these Outrages. That Govern
ment has also punished its own citizens for at
tempting to incite the citizens of another State
TO revolt against their Government or to assas-
sinate their rulers. For example, John Parry
was punished in 1893 for libelingl the Emperor
of Russia In a London journal Jean Petier
WAS convicted in 1903 of melting the French
people TO revolt against the First Consul Lord
George Gordon was prosecuted for libelling the
Queen of France; and Herr Most, in May,
1881. was sentenced for melting the readers Of
his journal 10 assassinate foreign sOvereigns
Only two Of these precedcnts, in our Iudg-
ment. arc directly applicable to the dynamite
outrages The Greek fire" case offers close
parallcl. and the arrest OF DR.. Blackburn
evinced a disposition on the part of the
Canadian authorities TO repress atrOcious
crimes against civilization. The only response
Al Tvfh nt
10 British circumstances in regard to dyna-
mite has been. the circular OF March II,
1891. in relation to the shipment or
dangerous explosives. 1t must not be for
gotten however, that Mr. Seward furnished the
British Government with definite information
respecting the Confederate plots, whereas Lord
Granville has never done this i'll the dynamite
conspiracy and how can the American courts
be expected to punish the whisperinSs OF
Fenian despcradoes in hall-bedrOOms, when the
Canadian officials found it impossible to pro-
ceed against DR.. Blackburn So far as the
libel precedcnts are concerned, three OF them
are too antiquated to be seriously considered
and the fourth is not applicable To the rawlings
of the Irish American press. The proceedings
against Herr Most have been condemned III
England by public sentiment and form a start
linz, eyceptiOn to the usual license allowed to
tbe press. But even the Freiheit was definite III
;ts Invitations 10 murder whereas the dynamite
rrass never singles out any Englishman. Even
if II were good policy to prosecute the irish
American press for soliciting subscriptions to
secret funds and extoling the pOlitica, virtues
Of dynamite, it would be impossible to apply
tbe English presidents and secure conviction.
The libels ana indictments to crime would be
too vague and indefinite to warrant press trial
even under Eng ish law.
Returning now to Professor Rogcrs's paper
we find that the only Federal statute which can
Ina brought to bear against the dynamite con-
snirators il that relating to the Illegal trans
narration of dangerous explosives. The Gov
e,unent in its circular OF March IL, 1854, has
exhausted the resources of United States law.
The Federal courts can only punish those
alliances which have been made criminal by
direct Acts of Congress. by the Constitution or
Inv International treaty and the Vaccinations
| OF the dynamite conspirators are not included
in the list of punishable Offences. Let an Eng
lish or an American detective overhear in a
all-be,lroom OF back alley the details OF
a deliberate plot against life and property IL
England and there is not court in the United
| States that can inaict punishment for tn,
offence. On this account Professor Rogers
pleads for change in the neutrality law
| whereby it may be made All offence against TN
Government of the United States for any on
within its jurisdiction to eonspirc against the
lives and property of the citizens OF foreigi
State. lie also contends that extradltion trcatie