tions. No power gives up a political fugitive. Strong powers protect them openly, while they demean themselves orderly weak powers get them to go away when not able to protect them. None give them up-not even the weakest. All the countries of Europe-the smallest kingdom, the most petty principality, the feeblest republic, even San Marino-scorn to give up a political fugitive, and though unable to chastise, never fail to resent any violation of its territory to seize them. We alone, and in the case of the Caroline, acknowledge the right of Great Britain to invade our territory, seize and kill American citizens sleeping under the flag of their country, to cut out an American vessel moored in our port, and send her in flames over the Falls of Niagara. We alone do that! but we have done it but once! and history places upon it the stigma of opprobrium. Mr. William O. Butler of Kentucky, replied to Mr. Cushing, especially to his rehash of the stale imputations, worn out at the time of Mr. Van Buren's senatorial rejection as minister to Great Britain, and said: The ground taken by Mr. Adams and Mr. Cushing for the defence of Mr. Webster (for they seemed to consider him, and no doubt truly, as the whole administration in this case) was only shifting the defence from one bad ground to another. The war ground they assumed could only apply between Great Britain and the insurgents': she had no war with the United States: the attack on the Caroline was an invasion of the territory of a neutral power -at peace with the invader. That is a liberty not allowed by the laws of nations-not allowed by the concern which any nation, even the most inconsiderable, feels for its own safety, and its own self-respect. A belligerent party cannot enter the territory of a neutral, even in fresh pursuit of an enemy. No power allows it. That we have seen in our own day, in the case of the Poles, in their last insurrection, driven across the Austrian frontier by the Russians; and the pursuers stopped at the line, and the fugitive Poles protected the instant they had crossed it and in the case of the late Hungarian revolt, in which the fugitive Hungarians driven across the Turkish frontier, were protected from pursuit. The Turks protected "He expected from the gentleman a discusthem, Mahometans as they were; and would sion on national law; but how much was he not give up fugitive Christians to a Christian astonished the next day, on reading his speech power; and afterwards assisted the fugitives to in the Intelligencer, and finding him making a most virulent attack on the conduct and repuescape to Great Britain and the United States. tation of Mr. Van Buren. The gentleman reThe British then had no right to invade the ferred to the letter of instructions of Mr. Van United States even in fresh pursuit of fugitive Buren to our Minister at the Court of St. belligerents: but the Caroline and crew were James, and compared it with the instructions of Mr. Webster to the Attorney-general; not belligerents. She was an American ferry-speaking of the latter as breathing the statesboat carrying men and supplies to the insur-man and patriot throughout, while he characgents, but she was not a combatant. And if she had been—had been a war-vessel belonging to the insurgents, and fighting for them, she could not be attacked in a neutral port. The men on board of her were not Canadian insurgents, but American citizens, amenable to their own country for any infraction of her neutrali-extracts from Mr. Cushing's speech.] The gentleman spoke of comparing the two letters ty laws and if they had been Canadian insur- together. But did he think of comparing the gents they could not have been seized on Amer- thing we complain of with the thing he comican soil; nor even demanded under the extra- plains of? No: that would be next to maddition clause in the treaty of 1796, even if in force.parison, and goes on to compare not the thing The gentleman shrinks from that comIt did not extend to political offences, either of we complain of with the letter of Mr. Van Butreason or war. It only applied to the common ren, but the beautiful composition of Mr. Weblaw offences of murder and forgery. How con- ster, written forty days after complying with tradictory and absurd then to claim a right to intended to cover over the instructions to Mr. the British minister's insulting demands, and come and take by violence, what could not be Crittenden, after which he characterizes Mr. demanded under any treaty or the law of na- Van Buren's letter as a monument of ignominy. terizes the former as infamous. Mr. B. said he would not repeat the harsh and offensive terms in which the gentleman had spoken of Mr. Van Buren's letter; he would read what the gentleman said from his printed speech, in order that the House might see the length to which his invectives were carried. [Here Mr. B. read ness. being those who were for prosecuting the inquiry, were: Now Mr. B. said he would make the same re- of New York, calling on the President for inply that a dignified farmer of Kentucky did to formation in relation to the steps taken to aid a lawyer. The lawyer prosecuted the farmer for a slander, and in the course of the trial took the liberation of McLeod; and the fate of the occasion to heap on him all the abuse and in-resolution was significant of the temper of the vective of which the Billingsgate vocabulary is House-a desire to get rid of the subject withcapable. Yet the jury, without leaving their out a direct vote. It was laid upon the table box, pronounced a verdict of acquittal. The The nays, verdict of an honest and intelligent jury, said by a good majority—110 to 70. the farmer, is a sufficient answer to all your abuse. Just so it was with Mr. Van Buren. His letter had made a great noise in the country; had been extensively circulated and read, and had been assailed with the utmost virulence by the opposite party. Yet the highest jury on earth, the American people, had pronounced the acquittal of Mr. Van Buren by electing him to the Chief Magistracy. The gentleman complained that the patriotism of Mr. Webster not only had been assailed, but that the gentleman from Pennsylvania had had the temerity to at-wards, Charles G. Ferris, John G. Floyd, Charles tack that most beautiful of letters which the patriotic Secretary wrote to Mr. Fox. Now he (Mr. B.) would admit that it was a beautiful piece of composition, and he knew of but one that would compare with it, and that was the proclamation of General Hull, just before surrendering the Northwestern army to the British." Messrs. Archibald H. Arrington, Charles G. Atherton, Linn Banks, Henry W. Beeson, Benjamin A. Bidlack, Samuel S. Bowne, Linn Boyd, Aaron V. Brown, Charles Brown, Edmund Burke, Reuben Chapman, James G. Clinton, Walter Coles, Edward Cross, John R. J. Daniel, Richard D. Davis, Ezra Dean, William Doan, Andrew W. Doig, Ira A. Eastman, John C. Ed A. Floyd, Joseph Fornance, James Gerry, William O. Goode, Samuel Gordon, William A. Harris, John Hastings, Samuel L. Hays, Isaac E. Holmes, Jacob Houck, jr., George S. Houston, Edmund W. Hubard, Charles J. Ingersoll, William Jack, Cave Johnson, John W. Jones, George M. Keim, Abraham McClellan, Robert McClellan, James J. McKay, John McKeon, Albert G. Marchand, Alfred Marshall, John The friends of Mr. Webster had a fashion of Thompson Mason, James Mathews, William extolling his intellect when his acts were in Medill, John Miller, Christopher Morgan, Peter Newhard, William Parmenter, Samuel Patridge, question; and on no occasion was that fashion William W. Payne, Arnold Plumer, John Reymore largely indulged in than on the present nolds, Lewis Riggs, Tristram Shaw, John Snyone. His letter, superscribed to Mr. Fox- der, Lewis Steenrod, George Sweeny, Thomas A. brought out for home consumption forty days Tomlinson, Hopkins L. Turney, John Van Buren, after the satisfactory answer had been given-brook, James W. Williams, Henry A. Wise, Aaron Ward, Harvey M. Watterson, John Westwas exalted to the skies for the harmony of its Fernando Wood. periods, the beauty of its composition, the cogency of its reasons! without regarding the national honor and interest which it let down into the mud and mire; and without considering that the British imperious demand required in the answer to it, nerve as well as head-and nerve most. It was a case for an iron will, more than for a shining intellect and iron will was not the strong side of Mr. Webster's character. His intellect was great-his will small. His pursuits were civil and intellectual; and he was not the man, with a goose quill in his hand, to stand up against the British empire in arms. Throughout the debate, in both Houses of Congress, the answer to Mr. Fox was treated by Mr. Webster's friends, as his own; and, no doubt, justly-his supremacy as a jurist being so largly deferred to. The debate in the House was on the adoption of a resolution offered by Mr. John G. Floyd, The same subject was largely debated in the Senate among others by Mr. Benton-some extracts from whose speech will constitute the next chapter. CHAPTER LXXVI. DESTRUCTION OF THE CAROLINE: ARREST AND MR. BENTON said the history of our country contained a warning lesson to gentlemen who take the side of a foreign country against their own: he alluded to the case of Arbuthnot and Ambrister, seized among the Seminole Indians in 1818, and hung as outlaws and pirates by the orders of General Jackson. The news of that execution was heard with joy by the American people, who considered these Englishmen as a thousand times more culpable than the wretched savages whom they stimulated to the murder of women and children-men who had abandoned their own country, and the white race to which they belonged, to join savages against a country with which their own government was at peace. The country heard the news of the execution with joy they approved the act of General Jackson. Not so with the politicians-the politicians of the federal school especially. They condemned it; partisan presses attacked it; and when Congress met, committees of each House of Congress reported against it-loudly condemned it-and were followed by a crowd of speakers. All the phrases now heard in claiming exemption for McLeod, and bewailing his fate, were then heard in deploring the fate of Arbuthnot and Ambrister. Violation of the laws of nations—inhuman-unworthy of the nineteenth century-shocking to humanity-barbarous uncivilized-subjecting us to reprisals, and even to war from England-drawing upon us the reproaches of Christendom, and even the wrath of Heaven: such were the holiday phrases with which the two Houses of Congress then resounded. To hear what was said, and it would seem that the British lion would be instantly upon us. We were taught to tremble for the return news from Englnd. Well! it came! and what was it? Not one word from the British government against the act of Jackson! Not the scrape of a pen from a minister on the subject! Not a word in Parliament except the unsupported complaint of some solitary members-just enough to show, by the indifference with which it was received, that the British House of Commons had no condemnation to pronounce upon the conduct of General Jackson. Their silence justified him in England, while committees and orators condemned him in his own country: and this justification from abroad, in a case where two Englishmen were actually hanged, should be a warning to gentlemen how they should commit themselves in a case where an Englishman is merely in the hands of justice, and has nothing to fear from "God and the country" if he is as innocent, as he now alleges, and which humanity would wish him to be. General Jackson was right, and the committees and orators who condemned him were wrong. He was right in the law, and in the application of the law. He had no musty volumes of national law to refer to in the swamps of Florida; and he needed none. He had the law of nature, and of nations, in his heart. He had an American heart, and that heart never led him wrong when the rights, the interest, and the honor of his country were at stake. He hung the Englishmen who were inciting savages to the murder of our women and children: and the policy of the measure has become no less apparent than its legality was clear. Before that time Englishmen were habitually in the camp and wigwam of the Indians, stimulating to war upon us: since that time no Englishman has been heard of among them. The example was impressive-its effect salutary-its lesson permanent. It has given us twenty-five years of exemption from British interference in our Indian relations; and if the assassins of the Caroline shall be hung up in like manner it will give us exemption from future British outrage along the extended line which divides the Union from the British Canadian provinces. It is humiliating to see senators of eminent ability consulting books to find passages to justify an outrage upon their own country. Better far throw away the books, and go by the heart. Then, at least, with American hearts, they would always have the consolation of being on their country's side. Better even to take the rule of the illustrious commodore whose actions have shed so much lustre on the American name (Decatur), and go for their country, right or wrong. Then they would always have their own hearts on their side. Besides, there is no book which fits our case-none which was written for the duplicate form of government which we possess. We have State governments as well as a general government; and those governments have their rights, and are sovereign within their limits. The protection of the lives, liberty, and property of their citizens, is among these rights: the punishment of murder, arson, and burglary, are among these rights. If there was nothing in the law of nations, as written in the books, to recognize these rights, it would be necessary for us to do an act which would cause a new line to be written in these books. But this is not the case. The law of nations as it now stands, is sufficient for us. It has been read from Vattel by several senators; and is determines to cross the line-to steal across the conclusive in our favor. What is it? Why, that if the citizens of one country commit an outrage upon another, you must apply to their sovereign for redress: but if the wrong-doer comes into your country, you may seize and punish him. This is the law of nations, and it fits our case; and we have followed it. The United States, as charged with our foreign relations, have made the demand for redress upon Great Britain: the State of New York, as the wronged local authority, has seized the wrongdoer, when he came upon her territory; and is giving him what he did not give her citizens-a trial for his life: and this she has a right to do: and if the federal government attempts to give up that man, she shrinks from the defence of right, violates the law of nations, and invades the jurisdiction of New York. river in the night-oars muffled-all noises silenced-creep upon the unsuspecting vessel, anchored at the shore, sleeping under the flag, and sheltered by the laws of her country, and the law of nations: and stealthily get on board. They run to the berths-cut, stab, slash, and shoot, all that they see-pursue the flyingkill one man on the shore-no distinction of persons-and no quarter the word. Several are killed in the boat: none escape but those whom darkness and confusion favored. Victorious in an attack upon men asleep, the conquerors draw the vessel into the middle of the river-it was just above the falls-set her on fire; and, with all her contents-the dead and the dying, the living and the wounded-send her, luminous in flames, over the frightful cataract of Niagara. One man alone had been spared, and he as a British subject, to be taken home for punishment. These are facts. What do they amount to in law-that of nations, and that of New York, where the deed was done? First, a violation of the law of nations, in invading the soil of the United States--in attacking a vessel (even if it had been a belligerent), in a neutral port— in attacking persons on neutral territory—in impressing and carrying off a man from our territory: then each of these acts was a crime against the municipal laws of New York. McLeod, one of the actors in that cowardly assas This brings us to the case before us. What is it? The facts of the transaction are all spread out in official documents, and sustained upon clear and undeniable testimony. Some Canadian insurgents are on an island, near the Canada shore, entrenching themselves, and receiving aid in men and arms from the American side. An American ferry-boat, the Steamer Caroline, carries that aid. She is seen in the fact-seen by the commanding officer of the British forces, as he stands on the Canadian shore, looking on. He sees her there late in the evening-saw her cast anchor near the island-sination, and conflagration, guilty upon his own and determines to destroy her there. Five boats boasting, and caught upon the scene of his outare fitted out in the dark to go and do the work; rage, now in the hands of justice in the State of and if they had done it there, not a word would New York, while no indemnity is offered for the have been said; for it was a British island, and outrage itself: this perpetrator we are required, she was there upon an unlawful business-vio- and that under a threat, to release from the lating the laws of neutrality, disobeying the hands of a State, which has the legal right to laws of her own country, disregarding the proc- try him. All this was years before-near four lamation of the President; and doing an act years before-December, 1837. The news flew which might bring her own country into trouble. upon the wings of the wind. It fired the bosoms If she had been found there and destroyed, not of the border inhabitants, upon a line of fifteen a word would have been said: but she was not hundred miles. Retaliation was in every heart, found there, and the captain of the boats, of his threats in every mouth, preparation open-war own head, contrary to the order which he had imminent. Mr. Van Buren was then President. received, and which directed him to the British To repress the popular risings, proclamations island, and contrary to the letter written by his were issued to prevent acts of retaliation, commanding officer on that very day, abjuring troops were stationed along the line, and armed all right and all intent to make a descent upon steamers floated the river and the lakes: to our coast, because it was ours: this captain, punish any violation of order, instructions were his name Drew, and an officer in the British issued to the district attorneys, and marshals; navy, without the knowledge of his commander, and the aid of the State authorities was claimed, now-nearly all the same members-when the present Secretary of State (Mr. Webster), and the present Attorney-general (Mr. Crittenden), were both present: and we all know in what manner that answer of Mr. Forsyth was received. It received the unanimous approbation of this chamber! Mr. B. repeated the expression-unanimous approbation! and said he would pause for correction if he was mistaken. (He paused. Several senators said, yes! yes! No one said the contrary.) Mr. B. continued: I remember that letter well, and the feeling of unanimous approbation which pervaded the chamber when it was read. Every senator that spoke, expressed his approbation. No one signified dissent: and the feeling was then universal that the proper answer had been given by the American government-the answer which the law of nations, our duplicate form of government, the dignity of the Union, the rights of the State of New York, and the rights of the owner of the destroyed vessel-all required to be given. If I am wrong in my recollection, I repeat the request: let me be set right now. (Several voices exclaimed, "right! right!" No one said the contrary.) Mr. B. resumed: a great point -one vital to the case as it concerns our action, and conclusive in this debate, is now established. It is established, that in the month of January last, when the answer of the American Secre and obtained. To obtain redress for the outrage the Senate was composed very nearly as it is to our citizens, and the insults to our national character, immediate application was made to the British government. That government delayed its answer to our just demand-avoided the assumption of the criminal act-excused and justified, without assuming it, either in words, or indirectly, by rewarding the actors, or even giving pensions to those wounded in the attack: for there were several of them in the dark and dastardly attack. Diplomacy was still drawing out its lengthened thread-procrastination the game, and the chapter of accidents the hopewhen McLeod, the boaster in Canada of his active share in this triple crime of murder, arson, and robbery, against the State of New York, and of violated neutrality against the United States, crosses over to the United States, exhibits himself on the very spot of his exploits, and in the sight of those who had often heard of his boasts. Justice then took hold of him. He was arrested on an indictment found against him, immediately after the act; and he was also sued by the owner of the vessel. A trial, of course, in each case, was to take place in the courts of the State whose laws had been violated. Vattel prescribed that. The United States had nothing to do with it. Her business was with his sovereign. To the State it belonged to punish the violation of her own laws, the perpetrator having been caught within her jurisdiction: to the owner of the boat it belonged to sue for dama-tary was read in this chamber, we were all of ges; and neither the United States, nor the State of New York, had any right to defeat his action, by releasing the defendant. It was a transitory action, and would lay any where where the defendant was caught. McLeod went to jail in both cases-the indictment, and the civil suit; and would seem to have courted that fate by coming over to defy it. The news of these proceedings fly to the British minister in this city (Mr. Henry S. Fox): that ministering those who dissent now. How was it in the addresses a note to the Secretary of State (Mr. Forsyth), demanding the release of McLeod: the Secretary answered, by the direction of President Van Buren, that this man, being charged with criminal offences against the State of New York, and sued in a civil action by one of her citizens, the general government had no right to release him: and would not undertake to do so. This answer was read in this chamber on the night of the 5th of January last, when opinion that he had given the correct and proper answer: and among the senators then present were the present Secretary of State, who has undertaken to get McLeod out of the clutches of the law in New York; and also the present attorney-general, who has gone to New York upon that errand. This is enough. Those gentlemen heard the case then, and uttered no dissent. The Senate was then unanimous-includ House of Representatives, where the same papers were read at the same time? How was it there, in a body of 220, and the immediate representatives of the people? About the same that it was in the Senate-only more formally expressed. The papers were sent to the Committee of Foreign Affairs. That committee, through Mr. Pickens, its chairman, made an ample report, fully sustaining the answer of the American government: and of that report, five thousand |