Page images

between the two governments respecting the questions at issue shall alone be laid before the commissioners, and (in the event of their not coming to an unanimous decision as provided in article IV) then before the arbitrator, without argument written or verbal, and without the production of any further evidence.

The commissioners unanimously, or the arbitrator, shall, however, be at liberty to call for argument or further evidence, if they or he shall deem it necessary.

NOTE.-Either cancel the whole of article VI, or substitute the following:

“In case of every claim, the official correspondence which has taken place between the two governments respecting the questions at issue shall be laid before the commissioners, and, in the event of their not coming to a decision thereupon, then before the arbitrator. Either government may also submit further evidence and further argument thereupon, written or verbal."


Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the President of the United States, hereby solemnly and sincerely engage to consider the decision of the commissioners, or of the arbitrator or umpire, as the case may be, as absolutely final and conclusive upon each of such claims decided upon by them or him respectively, and to give full effect to such decisions without any objection or delay whatsoever.


It is agreed that no claim arising out of any transaction of a date prior to the 26th of July, 1853, the day of the exchange of the ratifications of the convention of the 8th of February, 1853, shall be admissible under this convention.


All sums of money which may be awarded by the commissioners, or by the arbitrator or umpire, on account of any claim, shall be paid in coin or its equivalent by the one government to the other, as the case may be, within (twelve) eighteen months after the date of the decision, without interest.

ARTICLE X. The high contracting parties engage to consider the result of the proceedings of this commission as a full and final settlement of every claim upon either government arising out of any transaction of a date prior to the exchange of the ratifications of the present convention; and further engage that every such claim, whether or not the same may have been presented to the notice of, made, preferred, or laid before the said commission, shall, from and after the conclusion of the proceedings of the said commission, be considered and treated as finally settled and barred.


The commissioners shall keep an accurate record and correct minutes or notes of all their proceedings, with the dates thereof, and shall appoint and employ clerks or other persons to assist them in the transaction of the business which may come before them.

The secretary shall be appointed by the (principal secretary of state for foreigu affairs of her Britannic Majesty, and by the representative of the United States in London, jointly) representative of her Britannic Majesty at Washington and the Secretary of State of the United States, jointly.

Each government shall pay the salaries of its own commissioners. All other expenses, and the contingent expenses of the commission, including the salary of the secretary, shall be defrayed in moieties by the two parties.


The present convention shall be ratified by her Britannic Majesty and by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof; and the ratifications shall be exchanged at London as soon as may be within twelve months from the date hereof.

In witness whereof the respective plenipotentiaries have signed the same, and have affixed thereto their respective seals.

Done at London, the 10th day of November, in the year of our Lord 1868.

Mr. Johnson to Mr. Seucard.

No. 65.]


London, November 28, 1868. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your telegraphic dispatch of the 26th instant.

The San Juan protocol will of course be left as it is. Why you are of the opinion that the claims convention is “ useless unless amended” you do not state, and I am unable to conjecture. I have just had an interview at the foreign office with Lord Stanley, who read me a dispatch from her Majesty's minister at Washington, which stated that it was understood that all the cabinet disapprove of it, and had said that it was contrary to instructions. This latter statement puzzles me yet more. If I understand your original, and all the subsequent instructions, whether by telegraph or otherwise, the convention conforms substantially with them. By those of the 20th of July I considered myself authorized, if this government would adjust, as desired, the naturalization and San Juan controversies, to settle the claims controversy by a convention on the model of that of February 8, 1853. And as the two former were satisfactorily arranged, I deemed myself not only authorized but bound to adopt the course that I did in relation to the latter.

The convention is in substance the same with the one of 1853. The only difference is in the articles relating to the Alabama claims, in which it is provided that the head of some foreign government is to be the arbitrator to decide them in the event that the commissioners prove unable to come to a unanimous decision; and that he is to be selected by the two governments previous to their consideration by the commissioners. In all other respects the two conventions are nearly identical.

• By your dispatch No. 20, of the 23d of September, I was expressly authorized, as I understood, to agree to such a convention whenever I should become satisfied that the naturalization and San Juan questions were or would be satisfactorily arranged. It is true that in this dispatch the arrangement was not to be obligatory until those of the two former were finally settled. The same condition was annexed to my powers as to the San Juan matter, and I made the protocol in regard to that dependent upon the final and satisfactory settlement of the naturalization question. This provision is not inserted in the claims convention, not because her Majesty's government had or would object to it, but because the Senate might properly decline to ratify it until that was done, and in this effect your object. And such must have been the view of Lord Stanley, as I made him acquainted with this limitation of my authority. If, however, the signing of the convention without this limi. tation is esteemed a disregard of instructions, it is but literally so, and cannot, in any way that I can conceive, render the convention "useless” should it be ratified.

By your telegraphic dispatch of the 11th of November I was told, in so many words, that if I could get Washington substituted for London, as the place of meeting of the commission, all will be right.” And, as you have been advised, I did obtain this substitution.

That the naturalization question will be settled according to the views of our government is certain, whether this government remains in office or not. I know this not only from the public sentiment of the country, but from personal intercourse with some of the leading statesmen who, it is understood, will constitute a part of the government should there be a change.

Awaiting the receipt of the dispatches to which your telegram of the 26th refers, I remain, with high regard, your obedient servant,


Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.

Mr. Johnson to Mr. Seward. No. 70.]


London, December 4, 1868. SIR: Some time since I received the inclosed letter from Mr. Augustine E. Costello, who is now undergoing imprisonment at the convict establishment at Chatham, for treason-felony. I replied to it on the 4th of November, and stated that I should not fail to send it to Washington as requested.

At present I do not offer any remarks upon this and similar cases, but as official copies of the trials of Messrs. Warren, Halpin, Costello, and McCafferty liaye recently reached me, I trust soon to be able to send you brief but faithful summaries of these, with some observations upon each case. I have the honor to remain, with high regard, your obedient servant,


Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.

Mr. Costello to Mr. Johnson.

CONVICT ESTABLISTMENT, CHATHAM. Convicts aro permitted to write one letter on reception, and also at intervals of three, four, or six montlis, according to the class they may be in. They may also receive one letter (prepaid) at the above-named periods. Matters of private importance to a convict may be coinmunicated at any time by letter (prepaid) to the governor, who will inform the convict thereof if expedient. In case of misconduct, the privilege of receiving or writing a letter may be forfeited for a time. All letters of an improper or idle tendency, either to or from convicts, or containing slang or other objectionable expressions, will be suppressed. The permission to write and receive letters is given to the convicts for the purpose of enabling them to keep up a connection with their respectable friends, and not that they may hear the news of the day. All letters are read by the governor or chaplain, and must be legibly written on the ruled lines, and not crossed. Neither clothes nor any other articles are allowed to be received at the prison for the use of convicts. Persons attempting to introduee any article to or for a convict are liable to fine or imprisonment, and the convict concerned is liable to be severely punished. Convicts are not allowed to have money, books, or postage-stamps sent to them while in prison.

A visit of 20 minutes' duration allowed every three, four, or six months, according to class, between the hours of 10 a. m. and 4 p. m.; not on Sundays.

CHATHAM PUBLIC WORKS PRISOX. N. B.-The convict's writing to be confined to the ruled lines of these two pages. In writing to the convict direct to No. 9824, Augustin Costello.

OCTOBER 10, 1869. SIR: I presume I may be allowed to make a few inquiries which I deem important for me to know. Being cramped in paper I must, necessarily, be brief, therefore I hope iny few pointed remarks will not appear harsh or rude. Thus divested of all rhetorical flourishes, I would, first, respectfully inqnire if you, sir, have received any instructions in my case; and if so, what those instructions are ? Secondly, I would ask if (what a strange if!) I am an American citizen; if so, it is a sublime privilege. Thirdly, if the United States government has taken any action in my case, and what the likelihoods are of an eventual release, and when I will not tie you to a month or two; I only wish to know the "thereabouts ;" I am a long time waiting, and am only apprehensive

that the beginning of the end has not yet come. In the worst phases of life the inevitable is more eudurable than suspense. Judging from the present as well as the past, my future is not very cheering; but of course events of importance may be transpiring in the outside world which, if known to me, might make me think differently. I presume you are aware, sir, that I am allowed to know absolutely nothing on this or any other subject. But, as I am permitted to write a letter to my friends once in six months, I thought it would not be a bad idea to write to you instead, and learn, if possible, what the prospects are of being rescued from this life-in-death existence. I thought to have written you a special letter, so as not to interfere with my domestic letters, but the director, for some reasons best known to himself, denied me that privilege.

It may be, in the whirl of more grave and important events, that the United States government has failed to meet the issue raised in my case; or, as I have been conjecturing, the republic may not wish to disturb the amicable (!) relations existing with the mother country. Or, again, know-nothingisin may be, as formerly, in the ascendency, and hence the startling anomaly of one-third of the American popullation proved to be, according to the letter and the spirit of English law, British subjects. Truly we may exclaim with Joad : “Was ever time in wonders richer.” If I am to be condemned to penal servitude for enjoying liberty's first-born freedom of speech; if words, or even acts of mine, while in the United States, can make me amenable to British law, then I boldly assert that liberty is not to be found beneath the stars and stripes, and I brand that act of the legislature that conferred on me all the responsibilities, but none of the advantages, of an American citizen, as an insult and a mockery. But let it be known, to whom it may concern, that degrading and miserable as my present position is, I envy not that happiness of my fellow-citizens who are placed but a step higher, on the political ladder, than the negro under the old regime. I am not very pleasantly situated for letter-writing, neither am I sure that this letter will reach yon. I should like to give you some idea of prison discipline, but that is an interdicted subject-and no wonder. I would request that a copy, or, what is better, the original, of this letter be sent to the President. Hoping to receive a prompt and explicit reply, I am, sir, your most obedient servant,


United States Minister, London.

Mr. Johnson to Mr. Seward. No. 72.]


London, December 5, 1868. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your cipher cable dispatch of the 27th of November, which reached me on the 29th at about 12 noon.

I had an interview with Lord Stanley early on the following morning, and found he had received one in substance the same from Mr. Thornton.

In regard to most of the amendments suggested by you, he had no objection. Two of them, indeed, we had already formally agreed to. One of them substituting Washington for London as the place of meet. ing of the commission, and the other, incidental to that, giving to the British minister at Washington and our Secretary of State, instead of the United States ininister here and the foreign secretary of this government, the authority to appoint the secretary.

His lordship expressed, however, no willingness to change the mode of appointing the arbitrator who is to decide the question of the liability of this government for the Alabama claims. He did not, however, lead me to believe that his objection to the change might not be yielded. His view is, and was from the first, that the questions involved in these demands were of such a nature that it would be better for the two goyernments not only for the present, but for the future, that they should be decided by some friendly government. He thinks that in the contingency that the commissioners should not unanimously agree, the judgment of such an arbitrator would be more satisfactory to the two coun

tries and would have more influence in settling the principle upon which the demands depend than the decision of an individual arbitrator, how. ever eminent he might be. I confess that these considerations had much weight with me, and led me to agree to the provision which you desire to have modified. And as there was nothing in your instructions, or in the convention of the 8th of February, 1853, which I was told was to be the "model" of one I might sign, in any way inconsistent with such a provision, there was nothing to restrain me from exercising my own judgment. The present government, as you doubtless already know, have tendered their resignations, and are now only holding office until their successors shall be appointed. Who these will all probably be is not yet made public. But it is understood that Mr. Gladstone will be the premier and Earl Clarendon the foreign secretary. My negotia. tions must be suspended until he is in office. I shall lose no time when that happens to renew them with him, and I hope to be able to reach a satisfactory result. Whether this will be done by obtaining the change as to the appointment of the arbitrator to decide the Alabama claims exactly in the manner you propose, or in some substantially similar manner, I do not certainly know. But I believe I shall be able to succeed by one of the two modes. I have every reason to think (indeed I know from several conversations with him before the resignation of the late ministry) that Lord Clarendon entertains a sincere friendship for our goverument, and desires earnestly that every controversy between the two countries shall be speedily and amicably adjusted. I have the honor to remain, with high regard, your obedient servant,


Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.

Dr. Seward to Mr. Johnson. No. 49.]


Washington, December 7, 1868. Sir: Your dispatch of the 23d of November, No. 61, has been received; it is accompanied by an additional article” which on the 23d of November you signed with Lord Stanley, to have the same force and effect as if it had been inserted word for word in the convention of claims which you signed with his lordship on the 10th of November last. By this additional article Washington is substituted for London as the place for the meeting of the convention, and the provision for the appointment of a secretary has been changed so as to adapt it to that amendment.

This transaction on your part is in accordance with the suggestions of this department, and is approved. In regard to the whole subject, we are now waiting for the answer of her Majesty's government to the propositions which you have been instructed to submit for further amendment of that convention. The examinations and reflections which have been bestowed upon the matter of the claims convention have fully confirmed the opinion expressed in that instruction, that the further amendments thus proposed are necessary to secure the approval of the convention by the Senate of the United States. I am, sir, your obedient servant,


« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »