in Mr. Taylor's case, have the costs discharged to which Mr. Taylor had become liable on the trial, so that there might be no impediment to his resuming his residence at Monte Cristo, if he should desire to do so. S. W. Taylor, Esq. SIR, I am, &c. E. HAMMOND. No. 25.-Earl Russell to Sir J. Hudson. Foreign Office, December 9, 1861. HER Majesty's Advocate-General does not consider that Her Majesty's Government would be justified in taking any further steps in Mr. Watson Taylor's case. The explanations and assurances given by Baron Ricasoli, as reported in your despatch of the 1st ultimo, appear to Her Majesty's Government to be of a nature to bring the question to a satisfactory termination. Sir J. Hudson. I am, &c. RUSSELL. RESOLUTIONS, &c. of the German Diet, relative to Demands made on the King of Denmark.—1858—1861. No. 1.-Resolution of the Diet with regard to Holstein and Lauen(Translation.) burg, February 11, 1858. THE Diet at Frankfort came to a resolution on the 11th of this month (February, 1858) upon the propositions of the Committee in the Holstein-Lauenburg affairs, and has thereby declared: 1. That the Constitution of the two Duchies is not constitutionally effective; 2. That the Duchies do not occupy a position of equality and independence as regards the Danish portions of the country; 3. That the Constitution for the common affairs of the Monarchy is not in harmony with the fundamental principles of the Federal Law. On this account a demand has been made on the part of the Confederation upon the Danish Government to bring about a state of affairs in the Duchies which shall secure the independence of their special Constitution, the administration of the same, and their equal rights. The Diet expects to be informed as soon as possible of the measures adopted or contemplated for this object. The proposition of Hanover of the 4th instant that the Danish Government should be immediately required to bring into operation no new laws or measures, and to impose no new taxes in the Duchies before carrying out the principal resolution of the Diet, does not appear to have been as yet accepted, because it is in reality implied in the chief resolution, and it is probably not expected that Denmark will treat the Confederation with such great disregard. When the former Danish Minister, Von Scheele, in the sitting of the Diet on the 3rd comforted his friends with the prospect of the affair being handed over to a court of arbitration (Austräga!-Instanz) after the resolu tion come to upon the report of the Commission, his Excellency was, as we see, very much mistaken. The resolution of the Diet simply demands the abrogation of the measures which have been carried out contrary to Treaty; and even should the Danish Government propose a court of arbitration, it cannot be made applicable to existing circumstances. The Federal Power exercises its judicial functions: (1) in law controversies between members of the Confederation; (2) in constitutional disputes between Governments and Estates; (3) in claims of mediatised Powers; (4) in the case when the demands of private persons cannot be satisfied, because the obligation to give satisfaction is doubtful or contested among several members of the Confederation. It is only in the first and last case, according to Article XI of the Act of the Confederation, and Articles XXI to XXIV and XXX of the Vienna Act, that the decision by a court of arbitration is admissible. In the case before us, the question is as little about law controversies between members of the Confederation as about the demands of private persons. The Confederation as such, by virtue of its judicial authority, demands of Denmark the execution of its resolutions. Neither does the court of arbitration, from its organization, answer to the exigencies of the case. According to that proceeding, the Confederation first attempts to mediate through two or three of its Envoys between the contending parties; if this does not succeed, the defendant has within 4 to 6 weeks to propose 3 impartial members of the Confederation who possess in their territories a Court of Third Appeal, to the plaintiff, who chooses a court from among them. This court decides the disputed question in the name of the Diet, and the decision is of legal force on its declaration. The extraordinary legal means for restitution on account of fresh discovered facts and evidence can be applied within 4 years after the discovery of the intelligence. The Executive of the Confederation provides for the carrying out of the sentence in case of refusal. On the other hand, the Diet alone has the right to interpret the Federal laws and resolutions, so that its decision cannot be called in question by any higher Court of Appeal, which in fact does not exist. Who, then, could decide in the dispute between the Confederation and Denmark, when the illegality of the proceedings against the Duchies is by no means brought into question by the Confederation? Besides, we have here no simple question of right, but a political matter: as the Confederation demands the execution of the international promises of Denmark, no court can decide according to the formal principles of justice. A court of arbitration for disputes of this kind is a hope for the future. We are therefore strongly of opinion, as regards the views of Herr v. Scheele, that under existing circumstances there will be no huddling up of this affair by an arbitration court. No more is the Federal Court established by Resolution of the Diet of 30 October, 1834, adapted for the settlement of the disputed question. It is true it decides in constitutional disputes between Governments and Estates, but only when the Governments concerned give their consent. The Estates as such alone have not the right of proposing a court of arbitration. If even the Holstein and Lauenburg Estates had made a complaint to the Confederation, this affair could only be submitted to a court of arbitration upon the proposition of the Danish Government. That this will take place is scarcely credible, and if such a proposition were made, the question then arises whether the Confederation would accede to it after having unanimously asserted its judicial authority in this political question. Special importance must be attached to this unanimity, because the Confederation has thereby exhibited itself to foreign countries as a united body, able to repel with decision every unauthorized intervention. No. 2.-Report of the Joint Committee on Danish Affairs, July 29, 1858. [Adopted by the Diet, August 12, 1858.] (Extract.) (Translation.) 1. To announce to the Government of Denmark and the Duchies of Holstein and Lauenburg, that the communication of the 15th of July of this year cannot be regarded as a sufficient fulfilment of the Resolution of the Diet of the 20th of May of the foregoing year, and of the Federal obligations on which this Resolution, together with that of the 11th of February last are founded. 2. Consequently to require the Royal-Ducal Government, in accordance with Article III of the Execution-order of the 3rd of August, 1820, within a period of 3 weeks: (1). To declare more precisely whether the Constitutional Laws for the common affairs of the Danish Monarchy of the 2nd of October, 1855, and the Royal Proclamation of the 16th of October, 1855, respecting the formation of a Ministry for the common affairs of the Monarchy, and that of the 23rd of June, respecting a clearer settlement of the special affairs of the Duchy of Holstein, as also the sections 1 to 6 of the Ordinance of the 11th of June, 1854, [1860-61. LI.] 3 F respecting the Constitution of the Duchy of Holstein, cease to apply to the said Duchy, and respectively to the Duchy of Lauenburg; (2.) To make such communications through the organ of the United Committees, whose confidential sittings the Envoy to the Diet from the Royal-Ducal Government will for this purpose be invited to attend, as shall be in accordance with the Resolution of the 20th of May last year (No. 1), and secure the carrying out of the Resolutions of the 11th and 15th of February last year. 3. To authorize the United Committees to receive and imme diately examine the expected communication of the Royal Danish Envoy to the Diet for Holstein and Lauenburg. And 4. To invite this Euvoy to communicate the preceding Resolutions to his Government. A member of the Committee appointed for the question of the Constitution of the Duchies of Holstein and Lauenburg, though he was of opinion that the further consideration of the question should go to the Commission of Execution, could not, on the other hand, agree with the wording of the Report, nor with the estimate therein made of the Declaration of the Deputy for Holstein and Lauenburg of 15th July last year, because, in his judgment, no concession or step towards fulfilling the Resolutions of the Diet now before them was to be perceived in that Declaration. On account of the urgency of the affair, and because the abovementioned Deputy is not entitled to place his individual views before the high Assembly at any time, the majority of the Commission appointed on the 29th October last was unwilling to accede to the delay of 8 days which had been moved for; and the Execution Commission also was reluctant to delay any longer the bringing forward of their motions. No. 3.-Report of the Committee on the Danish Duckies Question, Frankfort, February 19, 1860. [Adopted by the Diet, March 8, 1860.] "DANS sa séance d'hier, la Diéte Germanique s'est occupée de l'affaire des Duchés de Holstein-Lauenbourg et de la publication des Protocoles des séances. Voici le résultat de cette délibération d'après le Protocole officiel. "Dans l'affaire des Duchés, les Comités réunis ont proposé à la Haute Diète : "1. D'annoncer, par la voie de l'Ambassadeur Royal Danois pour les Duchés, au Gouvernement Royal, que la Diète ; "(A.) Trouve que le Gouvernement Danois, par ses derniers actes vis-à-vis des Duchés de Holstein-Lauenbourg, principalement par les propositions faites aux Etats des dits Duchés, et par le rejet pur et simple des propositions des Etats, a manqué aux obligations que la Résolution de la Diète du 11 Février, 1858, § 2, litt. A et B, a imposées au Gouvernement Danois, et que ces obligations doivent être accomplies dans le plus bref délai; mais que pourtant la Diète; "(B.) Par égard pour les explications du Gouvernement Royal données dans la note de l'Ambassadeur Royal du 2 Novembre, 1859, ajournera encore l'Exécution sommaire résolue le 12 Août, 1858; "La Diète joint à cette déclaration, "(c.) La condition que, jusqu'à ce que l'état légal constitutionnel soit définitivement établi, comme il a été promis en 1851 et 1852; “(1.) La déclaration Royale du 28 Janvier, 1858, soit strictement maintenue dans toutes les affaires qui concerneront les intérêts généraux et spéciaux des Duchés; que "(2.) Pour le maintien du droit de ces provinces appartenant à la Confédération, toutes les propositions de lois qui seront soumises au Conseil Suprême Danois soient en même temps soumises aux Etats, et qu'aucune loi, principalement en matière de finances, ne soit promulguée dans les Duchés, tant qu'elle n'aura pas reçu l'assentiment des Etats, la Diète ne reconnaissant aucune valeur légale à des Ordonnances rendues en contradiction avec cette règle. "2. Quant à la déclaration du Gouvernement Royal de vouloir convoquer une Assemblée de Délégués pour la consulter sur une constitution générale et définitive, la Diète n'y trouve rien à opposer sous la condition que, "(A.) Ces délégués soient envoyés par les représentations légales spéciales de toutes les parties du Royaume, et qu'ils délibèrent sur la base fournie par les déclarations de 1851 et 1852; "(B.) Que ces délibérations aient lieu le plus tôt possible pour amener enfin un état légal dans les Duchés; et que "(c.) Les délibérations de ces délégués ne portent aucun préjudice aux droits des Etats des Duchés. "Toutes ces propositions seront sans doute acceptées. Le vote aura lieu le 8 ou le 12 Mars." No. 4.-Proceedings in the Diet in the matter of the Danish Duchies. [Adopted by the Diet, February 7, 1861.] (Translation.) Documents concerning the Constitution of the Duchies of Holstein and Lauenburg. Denmark for Holstein and Lauenburg. THE Ambassador, by order of his Government, gave his vote with the following statement: |