The alleged pretext for his prosecution was his supposed sympathy with the party now in power, the real motive or cause, as is well known here, being private matters of too delicate a nature to be made the subject of our comment.

Mr. Worrall's case.-Mr. Worrall was assessed for a forced loan, and on applying at the Legation for advice, was shown by Mr. Otway a despatch from Lord Malmesbury, which recommends British subjects to pay such forced loans under protest and on compulsion. In consequence of having made this protest, Mr. Worrall was arrested a few days afterwards in the public streets of Mexico by Lagarde, and sent off to Vera Cruz next morning, having thus to abandon heavy private interests in this country.

On submitting his claim for indemnity at the Foreign Office, Lord Malmesbury wrote him, stating "that there was no justification for the conduct of the Mexican Government in your case, and that it was his Lordship's intention to instruct Her Majesty's Minister in Mexico to require that you shall be properly compensated for the treatment you have undergone, and the losses you have sustained."

Although a Convention was signed by Mr. Otway in March, 1859, assigning Mr. Worrall an indemnity, and although this Government even directed Mr. Worrall, through the Foreign Office, to apply to Messrs. Barings for its amount, yet no money was remitted, and up to the present moment not a dollar has been paid.

Very little encouragement is given to British subjects standing up for Treaty rights, if the present case is a fair instance of home protection.

Claim of Messrs. Bates, Jamison, and Co.-This claim is now represented by Messrs. Bates, Barton, and Co., of the city of Mexico, and is for a sum of 8,815 dollars and 2 cents, the unpaid balance of a Government order for 98,000 dollars for import duties illegally exacted. The interest has only been calculated up to the month of April, 1859.

Mr. Charles B. Lambley.-Plunder of his house, on two separate occasions, by soldiers under the command of chiefs of the Constitutional party.

Mr. Thomas Gillow.-Repeated embargoes of waggons, mules, and horses, for the transport of cannon and military stores. As this claimant farms a very considerable estate, it is unnecessary to point out how serions must have been all consequential damages, in addition to those of the mere embargo.

Mr. John Innes.-Plunder of his store at Ejutla, in the department of Oajaca, by soldiers of the Central Government party, under the command of Cobos. There are a number more claims of the

same character preferred by Englishmen resident in Oajaca, of which we have not yet received full details.

Mr. Daniel Owen.-Plunder of his goods by soldiers of the Central Government, under the command of General Echeagaray, on the 17th April, 1858.

Mr. John Sumner.-Plunder of his house at Tlalpam, on the 17th October, 1858, by a party of soldiers under the command of the Constitutional Chief, Don Ignacio Delgado.

Mr. Thos. Fuller.-Embargo by General Pueblita in November, 1856, of waggons, mules, and effects, belonging to Mr. Fuller's extensive carrying establishment, thereby disabling him from fulfilling a contract with the Real del Monte Mining Company, for carrying ore from that Company's mines at Pachuca to their ore depôt at Real del Monte. The loss of this contract, in itself a most profitable one, is attested by the certificate of the Director of the Real del Monte Company. It entailed upon Mr. Fuller very heavy additional expenses, as he had to maintain upwards of 100 pack-mules without work. Subsequently he was compelled to break up a very profitable carrying business, and sell the mules he was unable to maintain, in consequence of the loss of his contract, for a little more than half their original cost. In fact, this cruel outrage created such an embarrassment in the affairs of Mr. Fuller, as to bring him to the verge of ruin, from which he has not recovered, and for which his claim will be very insufficient compensation.

Mr. William Hooper.-Plunder of effects, consisting of wearing apparel, books, papers, accounts, and mathematical and other scientific instruments, by a body of revolutionary troops during the sacking of the city of Culiacan, Department of Sinaloa, in the month of March, 1852, as attested by the judge of that city, Don Eustaquio Buelua, in a judicial document under date of 10th March, 1856.

Mr. Elliot Turnbull. This claim originated in the forcible entry of a large body of troops into Turnbull's hacienda, about 10 miles from the city of Puebla, in the month of May, 1858, and of robberies and destruction of property committed by them. Mr. Turnbull was especially recommended by Her Majesty's Ministers to obtain the necessary proofs. These proofs are now in his possession, and consist of sworn declarations of several witnesses to the act, taken before the judge of the district.

These claims originated in the following manner :-By a sudden and unexpected Decree issued by the General Government on the 31st of May, 1858, an extra 10 per cent. "internation" duty, and 20 per cent. import duty, were imposed on all goods coming from Vera Cruz. This imposition, contrary to the express stipulations of the existing tariff, was at once most energetically protested against by Her Majesty's Minister. The decree, although not repealed, was never again acted upon by the Mexican Government-a clear admission of its illegality.

The number of instances in which foreign Governments have demanded and compelled restitution of sums thus illegally exacted, are too well known to require enumeration, and it is unnecessary for us to point out how impossible it would be to carry out successfully any commercial transactions under a system of tariff at any moment admitting of sudden and arbitrary changes by the Mexican Government, or the illegality of their act: the sums exacted during the temporary operation of the decree still remain unpaid.

These sums, requiring no further proof or verification than the production of Custom-House receipts, ought, we submit, to be considered as admitted claims.

Matamoros Fire Claim.-This is a claim for goods destroyed by fire at Matamoros, in October, 1851. The goods were warehoused in a house occupied by the Government forces under General Avalos. The town was suddenly attacked by Carbajal, at the head of the rebel forces. The block of houses in which the goods were placed formed a prominent point in the line of defence, and was fortified and held by a portion of the Government troops. It was subsequently set fire to by the rebels, and the whole of the goods were destroyed. No notice was given by General Avalos of his intention to fortify the block, nor was any time given or opportunity afforded for the removal of the goods. A certificate of General Avalos proves the occupation and fortification of the premises for the purposes of defence, and their destruction by fire.

No valid objection has ever been raised by the Mexican Government to this claim, and their liability to make good the losses inflicted upon the losers, Messrs. Bates, Jamison and Co., under such circumstances, cannot admit of a doubt. The principle has been so clearly laid down in numberless cases, that to hold a different doctrine would be subversive of the very first principles of international law. To admit of a different principle in a country like Mexico, ever torn by internecine strife, would be to place the property of neutrals unconditionally at the mercy of military Chiefs. The Decree issued by President Juarez upon the occasion of the bombardment of Vera Cruz by General Miramon, in the month of April last year, providing for the indemnification of neutrals whose

property had suffered by that bombardment, places the question beyond dispute. The subject has been frequently urged upon the consideration of the Mexican Government, but hitherto without results.

The claim now put forward by Messrs. Bates, Barton and Co., as successors to Bates, Jamison and Co., is for

The foregoing list of claims against the Mexican nation, although it does not contain all, presents such a frightful catalogue of murder, spoliation, and robbery, that except it was vouched for on the most solemn and truest grounds, would be scarcely credited. Scarcely credited, indeed, as having happened in a so-called civilized country against the subjects of a friendly nation; and yet this catalogue of outrage is still very incomplete, for many individuals, such as Staines, Egerton, Gibson, and others, have lost their lives by attacks in the streets, in their dwelling-houses, and on the public roads.

Justice has, indeed, here iron hands and leaden feet, but they are never lifted in favour of the defenceless foreigner; some little show of inquiry, a constant and incessant persecution of witnesses, and never-ending expenses and outlay to, perhaps, some spirited prosecutor, ending in a mockery of investigation, and an impunity for crime, are generally the utmost attained.

Who can ever tell of the bitter dying anguish of these neglected victims, and how in their awful moments of desertion the hopeless conviction haunted them that no inquiry would be made of their fate, and no punishment fall on their assassins?

And who can tell what desolation the love of fathers, sons, and brothers may have caused in some far-away homestead; how, instead of gladdening news, they have found that the angel of desolation has passed by and rendered their hearths desolate.

In the name of humanity outraged, we call for energy in redress against this wholesale trampling on Treaties and international laws, and exactions from a country that professes to belong to the family of nations, a regard to the ordinary tenets of humanity, and a concordance with the creed of civilization.

No. 14.-Sir C. Wyke to Lord J. Russell.—(Received July 29.) (Extract.) Mexico, June 28, 1861.

THE past month has been fertile in events not only tragic in themselves, but terrible also from affording convincing proof of the degradation to which this unfortunate Republic has been reduced by the vindictive spirit of contending factions.

My correspondence by last mail informed your Lordship that the Church party was still in arms, led by ex-President Zuloaga and his Lieutenant-General Marquez, who, at the head of between 2,000 and 3,000 men, were enabled not only to hold their ground, but actually to drive the Government troops before them and ravage the whole valley of Mexico.

On the 2nd instant news reached this city that Marquez had seized and shot Señor Ocampo, one of the leading men of the Liberal party, and recently their Minister for Foreign Affairs, who for the moment had retired from public life and was living quietly on his estate in the country. This intelligence caused the greatest excitement here, and gave rise to threats of vengeance against those unfortunate members of the Church party who were confined in the prisons of this city.

The feeling of hatred against them became so strong that their relatives flocked to the different Legations and implored our intercession with the Government to protect the lives of the prisoners against the fury of the rabble. The French Minister, as doyen of the Diplomatic Corps, called a meeting of the different foreign Agents resident here, when it was unanimously agreed that we should seek an interview with the President, calling on him in the name of humanity to save these unfortunate persons, and at the same time to vindicate the authority of his Government against the attempts of that violent party in the State which meditated the commission of such a crime.

His Excellency received us very graciously, and stated that we need not be under the least anxiety, as he had already given orders for the guards to be doubled at the different prisons, besides adopting other measures to frustrate the evil intentions of those who wished thus to disgrace themselves and the country to which belonged.

The President kept his word, for that very night when the rabble rushed to the prisons they were kept in check by the military, and obliged to disperse without effecting their object.

This interview took place on the 4th instant, and there were present at it, besides the President and the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, the Ministers of France, England, Prussia, The United States, and the Chargé d'Affaires of Ecuador.

In the Congress stormy debates followed, and General Degollado,