are entitled, and which it is so essential to preserve, particularly in the present state of the controversy with her. I am sure I need do no more than call your attention to the subject, to insure such a disposition of it, as will manifest the regard which there can be no doubt of your entertaining for the rights and character of this state, in the conduct of a prosecution for an offence against her sovereignty. Very respectfully, your obedient servant. HIS EXCELLENCY JOHN TYLER, President of the United States. LETTER VI. TO LORD SYDENHAM. STATE OF NEW YORK, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, MY LORD: I acknowledge your excellency's letter of the 14th instant, informing me of your decision to surrender Charles F. Mitchell to the agent of this state, in compliance with my request. This act of enlightened courtesy is highly appreciated by myself, and I have no doubt will be viewed in the same light by the president of the United States, to whom it shall immediately be made known. I regret to learn, from an allusion in your letter, that your excellency labors under some misapprehension concerning the detention of a British subject in this state. Whatever may have been the character of the original transaction, in consequence of which that person was arrested, he had the misfortune, before any affirmance of that transaction by the British government, to be indicted in one of our courts, and, as is said, upon confessions of his own, for the crimes of murder and arson, committed in this state. His detention is solely to answer that indictment, and your excellency may be assured not only that he shall have a fair and impartial trial, but, also, that if the assumption of the responsibility of his offence by his government ought, according to the common law, or the law of nations, to relieve him from personal responsibility, he will be acquitted for that cause alone, even if under other circumstances he could be convicted of the heinous offences laid to his charge by the grand jury. I am, with very high respect, your excellency's obedient ser vant. HIS EXCELLENCY, THE RIGHT HONORABLE LORD SYDENHAM, Governor of the Canadas. LETTER VII. TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. STATE OF NEW YORK, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, SIR: I acknowledge sincere pleasure in the confirmation of the belief I have all along entertained, that the district-attorney of the United States for the northern district, in appearing in the supreme court of this state as counsel and advocate against the people, and for a prisoner indicted for murder and arson, is acting without orders or direction from the president of the United States. I am left to infer, however, that the conduct of the defence of the accused by that officer in his unofficial capacity, and in pursuance of a previous retainer, is regarded as unobjectionable. Trusting that you may feel at liberty to consider suggestions leading to a different conclusion, I beg leave most respectfully to observe, that various and conflicting opinions prevail in this state concerning the guilt or innocence of the accused and his personal responsibility for the offence laid to his charge. These opinions are unavoidably affected by feelings and interests growing out of the disturbed relations between this country and Great Britain. There is happily, however, one sentiment in which all the people of this state concur, which is, that the questions involved in the prosecution of M'Leod can be settled no otherwise than justly and honorably to the state and the country, if the decision shall be made by the courts of law in the ordinary course of legal proceedings. At the same time, this confidence in the decisions of the courts could not remain. unimpaired, if either the federal or state government were sup posed to interfere in any manner with the proceedings of the judicial tribunals. The apparent want of harmony between the government of the United States and that of this state, exhibited by the appearance of the district-attorney of the United States as counsel, requires explanation. Fully impressed with the conviction that even an appearance of conflict would be as much regretted by yourself as it could be by the authorities of New York, I beg leave to submit with all respect, whether in so delicate a matter, that would not be the safer course, which would require no explanation. The prosecution must, at least, labor under a disadvantage, when it is seen that it is regarded by the federal government as possessed of so little justice or merit, that the legal representative of that government is left at liberty, to lay aside his official character, and appear against the state in its court. Our citizens will feel that if they can not have the aid of the federal government in a prosecution in which the honor and dignity of the state are concerned, they at least have a right to expect that that prosecution shall not encounter the opposition of any officer of the United States, even in his individual and unofficial capacity. I can not see that that functionary, if he should be required to desist from the further prosecution of duties so incongruous with his official relations, would be obliged to make any sacrifice of personal interests and feelings different from that which is expected of every citizen when called to execute a public trust; and whatever his sacrifices might be, they would be altogether unworthy of consideration in opposition to the public welfare. I have no doubt that if the district-attorney should withdraw from the case, the court would allow his client ample time to procure other counsel. In submitting these views, I am very desirous not to be misunderstood. I am governed by no vindictive feelings toward the prisoner. I desire that he may have a legal deliverance, if innocent, and may be convicted, if guilty. If the assumption of responsibility by the British government be a legal defence for him, I shall cheerfully submit to the decision of the court in that respect. But I desire also that the decision, whatever it may be, may not be attended with any circumstance which shall deprive it of its salutary effect, or in any degree diminish the confidence VOL. II.-36 which my fellow-citizens have hitherto indulged in regard to the firmness and patriotism of the government of the United States. Be pleased to accept the assurance of high respect with which I remain your obedient servant. SIR: Your letter of the 15th instant has been received. It only remains for me to communicate with profound respect my dissent from your decision, and to state the grounds upon which that decision is deemed injurious to this state. Your excellency is pleased to say, that although nothing is more customary than for district attorneys of the United States, in all the states, to appear in defence of causes, civil and criminal, in which the government has no interest, yet this is the first occasion on which such an appearance has been objected to. I confess my surprise and exceeding regret in thus learning from the highest authority, that the government of the United States expressly disavows any interest in the cause out of which this correspondence has arisen. Permit me to state the nature of that cause, as it has been recognised by the president of the United States. A band of British subjects, armed, in a season of peace between their nation and ours, invaded this state under cover of the night, attacked an unarmed vessel lying in our waters, filled with defenceless people sleeping in supposed security, expelled them by violent and deadly assault, murdered one of our citizens and wounded others, and then cut the vessel from its fastenings, fired it, and sent it adrift down the falls of Niagara. Alexander M'Leod, having been found within our territory, has been indicted for murder committed in this transaction. The indictment was found upon competent testimony, including proofs of his own confession. The government of the United States has heretofore avowed an interest in behalf of this state, in regard not merely to the injury thus committed, but to the cause which has arisen out of it, and is now depending in the supreme court. It has declared that the transaction described was an unlawful invasion of this state, resulting in the destruction of property belonging to inhabitants of this state, and the life of one or more of our citizens. When her Britannic majesty's minister, residing near this government, protested against the detention of Mr. M'Leod, the president of the United States, as the organ of New York and her sister-states, in their foreign relation, replied to the government of Great Britain, that the offence with which the accused is. charged, was committed within the territory and against the laws and citizens of this state, and was one that came clearly within the competency of her tribunals. The president declined complying with the demand of the British minister, and declared that the circumstances urged by her majesty's representative, would not justify the interference of the president, even if he had the requisite power. The president further declared that no principle of international law, nor of reason or justice, entitled the alleged offender to impunity before the legal tribunals of the offended state, and that it was the undoubted right of the authorities of New York to vindicate, through the exercise of the judicial power, the property and lives of her citizens. The president further declared that such was the undoubted right of this state, even though the crime had been committed by authority of the British government, and was sanctioned by it, and notwithstanding the government of the United States had demanded redress of Great Britain for the outrage upon the peace, dignity, and rights of the United States, committed in the aggression at Schlosser. The president of the United States having made these declarations, became constitutionally bound to maintain them, and to guaranty, defend, and justify the state of New York with the power of the nation, if necessary, in "the vindication of the property and lives of her citizens." New York was steadily and regularly pursuing that course of vindication, when the British government peremptorily demanded the discontinuance of the proceeding. It is at such a moment that the president informs the state of New York that the government of the United States |
