Separate.] Mr. Moran to Mr. Seward. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: Mr. Adams, who is out of town for a few days, directs me to transmit to you the accompanying copy of a note from Lord Clarendon to him, of the 24th instant, together with a copy of its enclosure of the 21st, from Sir Roundell Palmer to his lordship, relative to the statements made by him lately in the House of Commons, with reference to the question of amending the foreign enlistment acts of Great Britain and the United States. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C. BENJ. MORAN, Secretary of Legation. Lord Clarendon to Mr. Adams FOREIGN OFFICE, March 24, 1866. SIR: I forwarded to the attorney general your further letter of the 12th instant, relative to the statements made by that gentleman in the House of Commons with reference to the question of amending the foreign enlistment acts of this country and the United States; and I have now the honor to transmit you a copy of a further statement which the attorney general has made to me by way of rejoinder to your letter. I have the honor, &c., &c., &c., CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c., CLARENDON. Extract from her Majesty's Attorney General's report, dated March 21, 1866. Mr. Adams's letter of the 12th instant calls for little further observation on my part. If Mr. Adams understood me "substantially to affirm" the two propositions embodied in this letter, all I can say is that he misunderstood me. I stated (as is the truth) that her Majesty's government voluntarily initiated a proposition" to the United States government Dotto amend the provisions of the British foreign enlistment law for the benefit of the United States," but that the foreign enlistment act of both countries should be revised with a view to their simultaneous amendment, if, after mutual,communication, such amendments should appear to the two governments to be practicable and desirable. I further stated the answer, which was in fact given by the United States government to that overture, describing it (and I think truly) as one which did not encourage Her Majesty's government to proceed further in the matter, and as one which, if the matter had been carried further, might have been used in Parliament as an argument against the existence of any necessity for the alteration of our law. But I did not, either directly or "substantially,' affirm that "her Majesty's government had been deterred from prosecuting this friendly proposal entirely by the cold and repulsive manner in which that proposition had been met by the United States." I disclaim wholly the inference which Mr. Adams considers to follow from the propositions which he attributes to me, namely, that "the whole responsibility for any failure of her Mafesty's government in securing for Parliament greater safeguards against the abuse of neutrality in this kingdom devolves on the United States." Nothing could possibly be further from my mind than the idea that the United States ought to be held responsible for the decision of ber Majesty's government to abide by and enforce the existing law of this country. It is one thing to attribute (as I think I was fully justified in attributing) considerable practical importance to the opinion expressed by the government of the United States at that juncture, that their own law was "very sufficient" for its intended purpose, and another thing to say or imply that because such was the opinion of the United States her Majesty's government were not solely and exclusively responsible for forming and acting upon a similar opinion as to the law of this country. The only other statements in Mr. Adams's letter which seem to me to require any remark, are those in which he insists that the only thing done by her Majesty's government was **a suggestion of an intention to make a proposal," and that "that intention was definitively abandoned before any reply from the United States came to the knowledge of her Majesty's government." I am surprised that Mr. Adams, who speaks so much in this letter of facts, (as opposed to reasoning, should again have overlooked the fact (proved by the passage of Earl Russell's letter of the 19th December, 1862, which was extracted in the appendix to my former remarks that her Majesty's government did not merely "suggest an intention to make a proposal," but expressly invited suggestions from the government of the United States which they failed to obtain. Upon the other question, whether the intention conveyed by Earl Russell had been "definitively abandoned" before the answer of the United States government was received, Mr. Adams (unless he has some private information not discoverable from the contemporaneous documents, and which has never been communicated to me) seems simply to confound two things materially different, viz: First. An opinion arrived at by the cabinet under the advice of the lord chancellor, that reliance might be placed on the sufficiency of our foreign enlistment act for its intended purpose; and, Second. A definitive resolution not to follow up the overture contained in Earl Russell's letter of the 19th December, 1862. I do not find in the documents to which I have access that any such resolution had been taken, in or out of the cabinet, before Earl Russell learned from Mr. Adams that the United States government did not consider their own foreign enlistment act to require, or indeed to be susceptible of, any improvement. No. 1728.] Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, March 31, 1866. SIR: I thank you for your very interesting despatch of the 15th of March, No. 1167. I have read with deep interest the debates which have occurred in Parliament on the subject of the newly proposed reform bill. Whatever difficulty that measure may encounter in Great Britain, it is manifest that it will have the benefit, whatever the weight may be, of a moral opinion throughout the world. I am, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c., WILLIAM H. SEWARD. No. 1729.] Mr. Seward to Mr. Adams. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, March 31, 1866. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch of the 15th of March, No. 1168, which is accompanied by a copy of a continuation of the correspondence between yourself and Lord Clarendon on the subject of the extraordinary speech made by the attorney general of Great Britain, on the 23d of February, in the House of Commons. The President is very well satisfied with your reply, which closes the discussion in a manner which is thought equally dignified and decisive. I am, sir, your obedient servant, SIR: Your despatch of the 15th of March, No. 1172, has been received. It gives an account of a conversation which you held on the 13th instant with Lord Clarendon, on the subject of the questions which have been raised upon the arrest of American citizens, naturalized as well as native, in Ireland. The friendly spirit manifested by Lord Clarendon in that conversation is appreciated. You have been already fully and distinctly informed of the views of this government, and it is supposed you will by this time have made them known to his lordship. On the present occasion, therefore, I shall limit myself to three remarks: First. I continue under the conviction that the United States cannot be expected to modify the views which they have heretofore expressed. Second. That any parties who may wish to disturb the peace of Great Britain, either at home or in the provinces, might be expected to build high hopes largely upon any difficulties which should incidentally arise between that country and the United States upon, first, the naturalization question, and, second, upon questions of trade between the United States and the British American provinces, including among those questions the subject of the fisheries. Third. Delay in coming to a reasonable and friendly understanding in regard to such incidental matters would probably be unpropitious. I am, sir, your obedient servant, SIR: I enclose herewith a copy of a communication which his excellency Frederick Smyth, governor of New Hampshire, addressed to me, in regard to the improper arrest and imprisonment in Ireland by the officers of her Majesty's government of Cornelius Healy, a citizen of the United States, upon a suspicion of being engaged in the Fenian movement. The state of the prisoner's health seems to render this case one of peculiar hardship, and one which requires prompt relief. With a view to this end I will thank you to bring it to the attention of the government of Great Britain. If the evidence submitted herewith is not considered sufficient to warrant her Majesty's government in releasing Mr. Healy, this government considers it desirable to become acquainted at the earliest convenient moment with the grounds upon which any justification of a continued detention of the prisoner is based. I am, sir, your obedient servant, CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq., &c., &c., &c. WILLIAM H. SEWARD. Governor Smyth to Mr. Seward. STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, EXECUTIVE Department. DEAR SIR: I am informed that Captain Cornelius Healy, a citizen of this State, and an efficer of its militia, is now incarcerated in Ireland, by order of the British government, upon the suspicion of being engaged in the Fenian movement. Captain Healy served for three years in our war against the rebellion as captain in the eighth regiment New Hampshire volunteers, and won the reputation of a brave and faithful officer. On returning from the war, broken in health and still suffering from a disease contracted in the service, he was advised by his physician to take a sea voyage to Ireland, in the hope that it would favorably influence the disease under which he was suffering, and acting upon the suggestion, he started for that country a few months since, and, as I understand, was seized and imprisoned soon after his arrival. It is quite impossible for Captain Healy, in his present condition, to endure even a brief period of imprisonment without the most imminent danger of serious and even fatal consequences, and I feel it my duty to urge upon you the utmost importance of immediate steps being taken by our government, through the proper officials, to bring this matter to the notice of the British authorities with a view to his early discharge and liberation. Trusting that the subject will receive your immediate attention and appropriate action, I have the honor to be your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State, Washington, D.C. FREDERICK SMYTH, Governor of New Hampshire. MANCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE, This is to certify that I have been attending physician to Cornelius Healy, late captain of the eighth regiment New Hampshire volunteers, U. S. A., in which service he contracted "remittent fever," from which he suffered severely; so much so as to impair his health to the extent that I believed a sea voyage and change of air would be necessary to his perfect recovery, and believing such, recommended him to go to Ireland for the benefit of his health. JOHN FERGUSON, M. D. STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, County of Hillsborough, ss: MARCH 16, 1866. Personally appeared John Ferguson, and made oath that the above certificate, by him subscribed, is true. And I certify that said Ferguson is a physician in good standing, and practicing in the city of Manchester, New Hampshire. Before me: JOHN T. MOORE, Justice of the Peace. STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, County of Hillsborough, ss : OFFICE OF THE PROBATE Court for saID COUNTY, March 16, 1866, I hereby certify that at the date of the attestation hereto annexed, John T. Moore was a justice of the peace in and for the county of Hillsborough, in the said State, duly commis sioned and constituted, and to his acts and attestations as such, full faith and credit are and ought to be given in and out of court; and I believe the signature of the said John T. Moore to be genuine. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the probate court, which I certify to be a court of record, of which I am the judge, duly appointed and commissioned, at the date above written. [SEAL.] DAVID CROSS, Judge of the Probate Court of Hillsborough County, N. H. I, John Ferguson, of Manchester, in the county of Hillsborough, and State of New Hampshire, on oath, depose and say that I am a physician, and have practiced in said Manchester during the past four years; that I was surgeon of the 10th regiment New Hampshire volunteers from August, 1862, to August, 1863; that I am and have been well acquainted with Captain Cornelius Healy, of said Manchester, during the past four years; that after his resignation as captain in the eighth regiment, New Hampshire volunteers, in 1864, I was his attending physician. He was suffering from "chills and fevers," a disease contracted while in the United States service, and all other means having failed in restoring him to health, I recommended him to go to Ireland, believing that a change of climate would be beneficial to his health. He accordingly sailed for Ireland in the autumn of 1865. It was upon a certificate of ill health, given by me, that he obtained his discharge from the army. JOHN FERGUSON, M. D. STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, County of Hillsborough, ss: Personally appeared the above-named John Ferguson, on this 21st day of March, A. D. 1866, and subscribed and made oath to the above deposition. I further certify that said John Ferguson is a physician of good reputation, in said Manchester, and all representations made by him are entitled to full faith and credit. Witness my hand and official seal. DAVID CROSS, Judge of Probate for said County of Hillsborough. PETITION To the Honorable WILLIAM H. SEWARD Secretary of State: Respectfully represent the undersigned citizens of New Hampshire, that Captain Cornelius Healy, of Manchester, in said State, was born in Ireland about the year 1835, and emigrated to the United States about the year 1847, settling in said Manchester, where he has since resided; that he became a citizen of the United States, and was elected and served as a member of the house of representatives in said State; that he was commissioned as first leutenant, and afterwards as captain, in the eighth regiment New Hampshire volunteers, in which regiment he served with distinction from 1861 to the fall of 1864, when he was compelled to resign his position on account of ill-health. His constitution having become so impaired as to render his restoration to health doubtful, he was advised by his physician to visit Ireland for its benefit. (Physician's certificate enclosed.) He accordingly sailed for Ireland in the autumn of 1865. Accordingly, to the best of our information and belief, he was arrested at Tralee, in the county of Kerry, Ireland, in the month of February, 1866, by the British authorities, and thrown into prison, where he now is. Believing that he is not guilty of the violation of any international law, or of any of the laws of Ireland or Great Britain, and that he has been unjustly imprisoned, and is now unlawfully held in confinement, we would respectfully petition that such necessary action may be taken in his case as will secure him his freedom and a speedy vindication of his rights as an American citizen. No. 1178.] FREDERICK SMYTH, Governor of New Hampshire. WILLIAM G. CLARKE, Attorney General of New Hampshire. H. R. CHAMBERLIN, City Treasurer of Manchester. E. M. TOPLIFF, Associate Justice Police Court, Manchester. JAMES B. STRAW, Deputy Collector of Internal Revenue. HERMAN FOSTER, Attorney at Law, Manchester. HAWKES FEARING, late Colonel 8th N. H. volunteers. C. W. STRAIN, late Captain 10th N. H. volunteers. WALTER CODY, late Lieutenant 3d N. H. volunteers. JOSEPH B. CLARK, Hillsborough county. E. S. CUTTER, City Solicitor of Manchester DAVID CROSS, Judge of Probate for Hillsborough Co., N. H. GEORGE A. BARNES. JOHN COUGHLIN, late Lieutenant Colonel 10th N. H. volunteers. Mr. Adams to Mr. Seward. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, London, April 7, 1866. SIR: There is no event to notice during this week, which has been one of repose for the holidays, customary at Easter, unless it be the publication in the newspapers of the Queen's letter to Mr. Peabody in acknowledgment of his great |